Saw the name - james 315.

Stopped right there.

It is probably best for james if folk do not encourage his really strange obsession with miners.

His article will be about miners and how they are destroying Eve. He should change his name to James One-Note.

The self obsessed ego and the miner obsessed ego.

I have to agree with you there, I did find that their seemed to be some sort of deep rooted hatred of miners in the tone, but despite it I found his arguments pretty compelling as a whole.

I suppose the outlining question is, would it be bad for Eve if High Sec was perfectly safe and Eve had a larger population as a trade off?

What good is a bigger population if I can not shoot them?

I do find the article compelling because I understand that Eve is played in a variety of ways beyond what I do and have done in the past

I think this is probably the first topic I have created in over 3 years on Eve Forums, but after reading the linked article I came to the conclusion that every single Eve player needs to read it. I would be very curious to hear the opinions on it.

http://themittani.com/features/road-nerfdom-highsecs-carebear-future

Trash article on themittani.com nonshocker.

I don't get why some people who's playstyle is represented in the lowsec and nullsec regions of EVE feel the need to whine and complain about a part of EVE space which is obviously not intended for them. If you don't like certain systems being relatively safeish for the theme park mmo minded PAYING subscriber to enjoy in their way, nobody is forcing you to play in them. Just stay out in lowsec and if that gets too boring you can always fly out to null. Those areas, which I suspect make up the majority of EVE space, are intended for you.

Well I suppose it depends on how you see it and how a larger population would mix into the game. I would presume that if you add say 300,000 more players to Eve today that a certain percentage of them will venture beyond high sec, hence it would likely result in having more people floating around in low, null and wormhole.

I can't really find anything negative about that as a whole. I mean to me, the idea of shooting someone in High Sec seems .... I don't know, pointless at least from the perspective of a Eve player that is the pursuit of advancement, wealth, politics and pretty much anything but the general tear induction that is suicide ganking. I have never shot at someone in high sec except during wars and I have been playing this game for about 7 years and I don't feel like I have missed out on some intracle part of the game or something...

For me, fighting is something that results from my pursuits beyond the borders of High Sec when me and my crew are running our various ops in Null or Wormhole and the occasional low sec ops, we fight and bleed... High Sec is kind of a place we return to, to gear up and get ready for the next excursion be it a short term daily op or a long term home out in space somewhere.

I guess my point is that if you eliminated suicide ganking, as a 7 year veteran that has tried most everything that there is to do in Eve from Sov Warfare, to mining, from can flipping to scamming (suicide ganking aside) I don't see how making high sec safer would have any impact on me at all.

I do find the article compelling because I understand that Eve is played in a variety of ways beyond what I do and have done in the past, but I question the wisdom of maintain a lower population and not reaching a larger audience with Eve is a good trade off just to keep something relatively insignificant like suicide ganking?

I don't get why people cry about the mining barge buffs. It 's natural for NPC companies to develop better defences for mining ships when they are expected to be frequently attacked by pirates. People learn to adapt and develop solutions to suit their needs so it makes sense that mining ships would become stronger to suit the needs of the miners.

Your correct, but in defense of the article what the author was saying is that players already had the option to adapt and they don't work for NPC corporations, they work for themselves. Tanking up a mining ship to avoid a suicide gank was extremely easy to do and 100% effective before the patch. People simply didn't do it, hence the point to make is that players refused to adapt, so CCP adapted the game for them. I agree with author that this is not a good way to go about developing a competitive game. If players can't adapt because the mechanics are unfair, than yea, fix them... but if you have the option to adapt and you simply ignore it because the rewards are better if you choose not to tank out your miner, than you have a made a conscious player choice and should live with the consequences.

The only question here is should there be consequences in high sec? Is a game without consequences fun? I think these are some of the fundamental questions about suicide ganking.

You are asking the right questions in my opinion. Other MMO-¦s that were leveled to a certain degree lost their spice and as a result of it - subs.
They maybe gain subs at first but I bet there are lot of people that get bored eventually and do not even know that there are such things like pvp let alone other players outside the empire borders...

Such game hoppers visit Eve for one, maybe 3 months and wait for the next game that they can try to come out. They eventually resub after a break and play casually but they are not the target group that invests a lot of real life money continously.

Their corps can't defend them until they are agressed, by which time it is too late anyway.

For suicide gankers, they get concorded, but again, there are no pre-emptive precautions that can be taken against them in high sec. In low sec, the corps could just kill them the moment they appear in local. You can't do that in high-sec.

Saw "Mittani.com" in the header, said "Oy Vey" and took wide pass.

The thing is, high sec actually favours the gankers as I understand it. They can steal from miners and there is nothing the miners can do. Their corps can't defend them until they are agressed, by which time it is too late anyway. The miner has been ganked if he fights back and his wreck is looted and salvaged by an alt.

For suicide gankers, they get concorded, but again, there are no pre-emptive precautions that can be taken against them in high sec. In low sec, the corps could just kill them the moment they appear in local. You can't do that in high-sec.

After playing EVE for maybe two months I could have already told you that what you just said was wrong.

Which is working as intended. That doesn't need to be changed.

For suicide gankers, they get concorded, but again, there are no pre-emptive precautions that can be taken against them in high sec

i wonder why so many people are so bent on seeing hisec turned into a carebear paradise, almost like a separate shard

maybe they should try a different game?

^ Maybe you should try low sec out or perhaps null, if a safer area is not making the game enjoyable.

I didn't say anything about changing it. I was just making a point that high sec isn't as safe for carebears as it's made out to be. Lowsec/Nullsec is actually a lot safer if they are in a strong corp.

Trash article on themittani.com nonshocker.

Back in the day suicide ganking was a touch and go kind of thing. Your ship could be almost the cost of the ship you were going to kill.

maybe you should accept that all this reduction in risk needs an accompanying reduction in rewards

bye-bye hisec incursions, l4s, etc

Highsec, like everywhere else, was never intended to be safe. Things may be slowly changing that now, but highsec was still never intended to be safe.

Highsec, like everywhere else, was never intended to be safe. Things may be slowly changing that now, but highsec was still never intended to be safe.

It's supposed to be more secure, that's why it's called highsec. You can have the strongest mercenaries in the game defending your miners, but in high sec, they still won't be as secure as they would be in lowsec. That's not something I care about because I like it when miners get ganked. I'm just pointing out that perhaps the system needs to be changed around a bit so it makes more sense.

It's supposed to be more secure, that's why it's called highsec. You can have the strongest mercenaries in the game defending your miners, but in high sec, they still won't be as secure as they would be in lowsec. That's not something I care about because I like it when miners get ganked. I'm just pointing out that perhaps the system needs to be changed around a bit so it makes more sense.

once they go GCC they're free targets just fyi

I think old doctrines should be questioned and I'm still trying to understand how suicide ganking benefits the game in any way.

simple: it makes you use common sense so that you can make rational decisions like "hmm maybe I shouldn't autopilot this freighter with 30 billion ISK worth of stuff"

Saw "Mittani.com" in the header, said "Oy Vey" and took wide pass.

I mean if thats really it, than yeah, **** it. Ban sucide ganking. The trade off is not worth it. I honestly thought there would be more to it than that.

I'm not sure what GCC means.

Holy crap that was a well made article of nutter and whack job.

I really loved "Having demonstrated that the exhumer change was simply a nerf to aggression dressed up as a "rebalance", a number of important questions remain."

Yeah because it made so much sense to have a deep space non-combat ship with a hull made from the same thing as this set of articles, Tin Foil.

Is there an award for nut job of the year? Normally James 315 trolls a lot, I suppose this could be one really long arse troll. I was waiting for his Final Solution as this really came over as a manifesto.

once they go GCC they're free targets just fyi

Or ban autopilot.

That's telling.
Please go read up on aggression mechanics before you post your two cents in this thread.

That's telling.
Please go read up on aggression mechanics before you post your two cents in this thread.

If I rob a bank, the police aren't going to blow up my car and leave me to walk away, and my friends certainly will not be able pick up the bags of money and just walk away.

The current system is nonsense. At the minimum, a high sec ganker should be detained, and fined, and any goods remaining would be returned to the victim.

What happens right now isn't exciting emergent gameplay, its exploitative behavior of an patched together system. The only reason it exists is because of the developer's reluctance to remove player freedom.

Or you could just explain what it means and why the previous statement I made that you picked up on was wrong. I'm sorry if it's beneath you to explain something like that to someone who doesn't know better for the sake of a civil discussion.

Please tell me all about it. I'll wait for the 60 page explanation.

Oh, that's right. It being revised for just that reason...

On the flip side, if you rob the bank, you're not going to be magically held at the bank until the cops arrive and blow up your car, nor will the cops have a 100% chance of succeeding in catching you and blowing you up.

If the cop could warp to the banks location in a moments notice...yeah, I think they could pull it off. You do understand analogy though right? The point is that the mechanics don't make any sense to anyone else but eve players...

If the cop could warp to the banks location in a moments notice...yeah, I think they could pull it off. You do understand analogy though right? The point is that the mechanics don't make any sense to anyone else but eve players...

And whenever someone steals from your can, your entire corp can attack them right from the start

If the cop could warp to the banks location in a moments notice...yeah, I think they could pull it off. You do understand analogy though right? The point is that the mechanics don't make any sense to anyone else but eve players...

the point is that you want absolutely no risk in hisec at all whatsoever

It would be nice if CONCORD was a bit more realistic in its resources and power, but I think that would lead to larger corps destroying the whole game.

If I rob a bank, the police aren't going to blow up my car and leave me to walk away, and my friends certainly will not be able pick up the bags of money and just walk away.

The current system is nonsense. At the minimum, a high sec ganker should be detained, and fined, and any goods remaining would be returned to the victim.

What happens right now isn't exciting emergent gameplay, its exploitative behavior of an patched together system. The only reason it exists is because of the developer's reluctance to remove player freedom.

I think this is probably the first topic I have created in over 3 years on Eve Forums, but after reading the linked article I came to the conclusion that every single Eve player needs to read it. I would be very curious to hear the opinions on it.

http://themittani.com/features/road-nerfdom-highsecs-carebear-future

Your correct, but in defense of the article what the author was saying is that players already had the option to adapt and they don't work for NPC corporations, they work for themselves. Tanking up a mining ship to avoid a suicide gank was extremely easy to do and 100% effective before the patch. People simply didn't do it, hence the point to make is that players refused to adapt, so CCP adapted the game for them. I agree with author that this is not a good way to go about developing a competitive game. If players can't adapt because the mechanics are unfair, than yea, fix them... but if you have the option to adapt and you simply ignore it because the rewards are better if you choose not to tank out your miner, than you have a made a conscious player choice and should live with the consequences. Thats kind of like saying that an industrial player chose not to put warp stabilizers on his industrial ship because he filled it with cargo expanders and than came to CCP and demanded 5 free points on the industrial ships because its not fair that they can be warp scrammed. I don't think anyone would agree this is a good idea, but its effectively what happen with exhumers.

The only question here is should there be consequences in high sec? Is a game without consequences fun? I think these are some of the fundamental questions about suicide ganking.

Some well fitted ships cost more to gank, but there was not, is not, and should not be any mining ship which is 100% gank proof.

I was interested in seeing what you had to say until I saw "themittani.com" link. All curiosity disappeared rather quickly after that.

Would you care to post a mining ship fit which was 100% gank proof?

Some well fitted ships cost more to gank, but there was not, is not, and should not be any mining ship which is 100% gank proof.

the point is that you want absolutely no risk in hisec at all whatsoever

When I said 100% gank proof I wasn't referring to the tank (probably should have made that more clear) but simply to the fact that people would not gank you because it wouldn't be cost effective. Ganking at least for the large majority is still a profit game. Ultimatly every ship in the game can be ganked if cost is not an issue.

What good is a bigger population if I can not shoot them?

The onus, so to speak, is on those who want to change the game to make suicide ganking more marginal and rare, not on those who believe it should stay as it is now.

I was interested in seeing what you had to say until I saw "themittani.com" link. All curiosity disappeared rather quickly after that.

There shouldn't be that much risk...it is afterall HIGH SECURITY SPACE. Not saying there should be no risk but yeah...it's kinda fine the way it is.

Lol.

1. You cant mine afk in high sec, because you need to switch and target a new asteroid nearly after every cycle.

2. It's just a ganker's whine thread from a one sided ganker perspecive who only play a little aspect of EVE ( ganking miners in high security space), and makes conclusions for the whole game, so the article is everything but not objective.

3. New players and carebears still have a lot of fail and error that can occur while they play even if they never mining at all -> EVE is still a hard game for newbies and everyone else too.

(4. Why ganking a miner is so good? I rather gank a hauler to make a profit. but ganking a hauler is hard and you need patience, so its easier to gank a miner for 0% profit just to blow up someone and feel yourself evil, etc maybe, I don't know. Ganking miners would be fun for a short time, but in long term, I think it cause pleasure only to people who have some mental trouble. IMO.)

Lol.

1. You cant mine afk in high sec, because you need to switch and target a new asteroid nearly after every cycle.

Another butthurt "I want EVE to be played my way wah wah wah" thread...people tend to forget that the membership of Goonswarm, and those who actually visit the forums, only represent a very small proportion of the total EVE player base.

What the Goonies in turn seem to forget, is that for most players, EVE is a casual pursuit, not a meta game. I suggest Goons go off and find something more in line with their requirements, rather that trying to change something that most players are generally happy with.

Nothing new here. Move on.

Thank you for creating an alt just for my post, but we aren't looking for posts that start with LOL and other internet jiberish, we are looking for creditable people with creditable opinions. So if you don't mind, either post with your main and make a point, or go here https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=8170&find=unread and make fun of peoples avatars. Thanks

Suicide gank breaks the core tenant of the game that is that you must risk much to gain much. High sec gankers exploit the patchwork mechanics of aggression in high security. In low security, such miscreants would be dealt with before they had a chance to act, instead the false security protects them from appropriate aggression until after the deed has been done and the consequence have been met.

In no way is losing a worthless pod or frigate a deterrent to further criminal action on the part of the aggressor (ganker). High sec players have no recourse by which to deter this activity. It is the funny little loop hole in the system that makes this all possible.

To put it another way. It would be better to completely remove the high security system than to continue allow this exploitative behavior. It is inconsistent with the spirit of play. I would pop every low standing pilot I saw without question if I had the choice. In my mind, if you flip cans and pop noobs, ninja salvage/loot or suicide gank. I would give you plenty of lead to chew on. On sight. In my mind, high sec is where civilized player play, and none of that nonsense should be allowed.

I think the changes to aggression will help alleviate this concern, but the problem won't be completely gone. I rather that low security standing players step in fear into high security. They fully understand that stepping into high security with low standing means they are at the full mercy of the high sec population. They earned it, they should reap it.

high sec is where civilized player play

1. Creditable options doesn't depends on the first word of a post.
2. You can't do anything to silence me, and I know this make you feel frustrated.

Are there any people left who aren't cowards or plain idiots ? o_O

Well put. Thanks for that.

Lets assume for a second you got your way, do you believe the Risk vs. Rewards in high sec are appropriate today? Level 4 Missions for example?

It's funny you bring that up. I always felt that someone who shoots at a poor, defenceless rock all day was both a coward & an idiot.

Not frustrated at all. I was just hoping you would make a well constructed post with an actual opinion that deserves to be heard. So far your doing a **** poor job of it, even with an alt.

I don't really understand your problem, but I play this game for some years now, and I think the biggest whiners are always the old players. My opinion is that this crying about mining changes and things like that articles are just as same whine threads as threads about "someone blow up my untanked hulk".

A: Some killed me :(
B: Adapt or go play wow.

or:

A: I can't kill someone like as easy as before :(
B: Adapt or go play wow.

Again I just want to point out that no one is whining here. Its 6 pages of mostly civil discussion about a well written and well thought out article. Agree with it, disagree with it, make your case why or why not. What you did was create an alt to hide your in game identity to ensure your anonymity, refer to people participating in the discussion as whiners and made a pretty poor attempt to appear "tough" or "veteran" in reference to some gibberish about blowing up haulers. You can't expect anyone to take you seriously right?

It's funny you bring that up. I always felt that someone who shoots at a poor, defenceless rock all day was both a coward & an idiot.

Well of course new players would venture out into low/null/WH space if they were left alone long enough to build some sort of buffer for when they lose their ships. Just starting out and getting ganked before you can get anywhere or attain anything is a huge turn-off and makes ya just wanna quit. It's not carebearing, its like walking outside and getting hit by lightening every time, eventualy you stop going outside.

You think you can expect? Why? Because you made your alt x years ago? Lol :D

What a load of crap, get a grip, cowards in a game, lmao it's a game if you've not noticed.

Miners in RL risk their lives, I wouldn't say they're cowards for demolishing rocks..

Yes, EVE is a game. Real life mining is not a game. I am glad you have learned something today.

But, I do tend to get tired of listening to macho bullshit.

i wonder why so many people are so bent on seeing hisec turned into a carebear paradise, almost like a separate shard

maybe they should try a different game?

Classic case of scrub. Goon whines that hisec ganking isn't easy enough.

If EVE didn't have miners, PvP'ers would be forced to do the mining themselves or biomass themselves and uninstall.

Miners need PvPers and PvPers need miners. If there's no business being made, war cannot be conducted. War profits from conflict, conflict profits from logistics (mining, refining, production and distribution).

Or think of it this way

Mine rocks, make stuff -> Stuff kills stuff -> Mine rocks, make stuff

This wheel is what drives EVE.

if having a safer hisec increases the amount of players in eve, and that increase has a trickle down to null, then i cant see the problem, a healthy increase in subscriber numbers benifits us all, so meh

npc posting alts are hilarious

if having a safer hisec increases the amount of players in eve, and that increase has a trickle down to null, then i cant see the problem, a healthy increase in subscriber numbers benifits us all, so meh

Its worth pointing out as well that suicide gankers have always existed side by side with miners, and there always have and continue to be an unlimited supply of people willing to mine.

My question is, though, if the new players are showing up because of "carebear buffs", should we expect that these players venture beyond high sec with the same frequency as those of us who play now?

I don't remember too much in the way of suicide gankers, ganking miners prior to the first Hulkageddon.

Suicide pilots only have themselves to blame for the changes (if they don't like the changes). Like anything if people push things to the limit, then they'll be changes. So people should be thanking the the first organiser and Goons/Mittens for the new mining ship changes.

Actually it's funny that the same people moaning about the changes are the ones that's are responsible in part for them.

I think this is probably the first topic I have created in over 3 years on Eve Forums, but after reading the linked article I came to the conclusion that every single Eve player needs to read it. I would be very curious to hear the opinions on it.

http://themittani.com/features/road-nerfdom-highsecs-carebear-future

Look another mittani self ************ post.

This, coming from the guy and corp that's turned null into a a carebear land.

Amount of Risk Involved:

Null Sec > Low Sec > High Sec

Amount of Isk that can be earnt per hour:

Null Sec > Low Sec > High Sec

"Ideal" Character progression (i.e. what you want the majority of players to do):

Highsec -> Low Sec -> Null Sec


As a rule of thumb anything you can do in empire should be more profitable (assuming you don't die) or you can do it better/longer/faster/stronger in Low Sec.

Then anything you can do in Low Sec is more profitable in Null Sec.

That censored word is another word for anus.

i would guess that a whole bunch of these "supposed" new carebear subs would stay in the safe environs of hisec but some will venture out further afield and bolster the population of lo and null sec, and any increase in these populations has to be a good thing for null and lo pvp not to mention increased sub numbers for ccp (we know how hilmar likes to monitor subs before investing in new devs)

so whats the downside ?

lack of non consensual pvp in hisec
no more ganking

cant see that being a big issue, if the gankers wanna gank then go to losec or null and try see how you get on there,
there will still be noobs to pick on only thing is your gonna have to do it outside of hisec,

the possible benefits IMO however outweigh the tears of players who like to pick on hisec players,

there is room in eve for both playstyles and adapting game mechanics in hisec doesnt really upset anyone bar goonie pubbies

Well, I'm not sure how long you have played this game (assuming your using a posting alt) but suicide ganking before Hulkagedon was far broader of a phenomenon which included pretty much any target on which one could make a profit. Not sure about the frequency, as I have said, I have never been ganked, no one has ever attempted to gank me and I have never seen a gank in progress in 6 + years of playing this game so to me the whole thing is kind of a myth. gf the forums are any indication, however, suicide ganking was definitely more prevalent back in the day. That or people complained about it more back than. In any case it became more focused during the hulkagedon on miners specifically, and naturally their is a connection between that ongoing event and exhumer buffs. But I find it kind of an inconsistent response by CCP, I mean tomorrow Goons might decide its "Industrialgedon"... so what are we going to do? Buff every ship anytime an alliance makes a ganking event around it?

I guess what I'm driving at here is that, I don't see how making sweeping game changes in response to player events is in the spirit of Eve. CCP seemingly, at least in the public eye (as the author pointed out) encourages player events and seems to thrive on the publicity for their game when they occur, yet they turn around and suddenly present us with changes to the game that prevent such a thing from happening in the future. Which suggests that they obviously don't want us to organize in this fashion.

I think the author of this article makes a good point about this connection and I do believe that its a very unhealthy approach. I'm not saying I support suicide ganking here, as I still am yet to hear a reasonable argument for its existance, but certainly I support many other types of mechanics in which players are thrown to the spear through organization of events by players.. like war decs for example. Can we expect that everytime players organize an event and the results are "people get blown up" that their will be a game mechanic to prevent that event in the future?

I think that's the point the author is kind of driving home here. This is less about suicide ganking and more about how CCP responds to the organization of player driven content/events. Is this the new status quo? Next time I war dec someone can I expect the game to be nerfed to discourage me from doing it?

I think the biggest problem EVE has though is the fact it does not really have the same feel of being an MMO as other MMOs do. Due mainly to the chat system and the fact we don't see other peoples characters (ships) very often. Plus with the EVE idea of don't trust people in EVE pug groups are less likely to form. Sometimes the forums seem more of an MMO than the game does. I'm sure that a lot of you will disagree with me on this, but it is looking at the game from a player's view in an NPC corp, althought some players in NPC corps work to improve them.

2) NPC corps, reduce the willingness to join player corps due to the fact you can't get back to the starter corp once you've joined a player corp (if that player corp proves to be not a great place to be).

I underlined the part I wanted to address (because I'm too lazy to edit, and context and all that)

I don't think the article really makes that case. It is clear that ship revision is an ongoing effort, I think the arguement that the changes to miners were targeted to specifically stop ganking can be clearly unsupported by that simple observation. That is unless you hold to the opinion that the rest of the ship revisions are all in an effort hide CCP's "true purpose" of making carebear, afk mining appealing.

You could make the case that past changes have been made to insure that high security ganking doesn't become more prevalent by being hugely profitable.

The only way I see high security ganking as a valid tactic is if it were part of a larger strategic initiative on the part of low/null sec corporations to preserve profit margins. I think that would be in the spirit of eve. The risk is large scale ship losses on the bet that margins for low/null sec material become more desirable.

Ganking for the lulls, or some some strange hatered of high sec miners or gaming the security mechanics? No, I don't agree that that gameplay should specifically be preserved.

Not sure what you mean here. Are you under the impression that once you join a player corp, you can't return to an NPC corp?

Why people can't accept EVE's core concept as it is (and leave if they don't like, STO is available) is beyond me.

You missing out on a very good eve news site.


Regardless of the name - just have a look . Be surprised.

To be fair, STO is pretty terrible. :)

Which is even MORE reason for the "change the game" crowd to migrate there, imagine how much better they could make STO by stopping suicide ganking klingon warbirds and AFK-cloaked Science ships!

Read the first half of a paragraph, didnt bother reading the rest because it has been incredibly obvious to anyone who has been following the recent changes and all greyscales hurf blurfing about crimewatch that this is what CCP are doing.

You could say that. The reality is that it is hot mess of ability bloat which tries to hide fundamentally simplistic gameplay.

Good thing it is free now. That's the only price point that could make it viable.

Not sure what you mean here. Are you under the impression that once you join a player corp, you can't return to an NPC corp?

You can't return to the NPC starter corp that you started in, you end up in one of what I call the drop-out NPC corps where other ex-player corp pilots go.

To be fair, STO is pretty terrible. :)

Saw the name - james 315.

Stopped right there.

It is probably best for james if folk do not encourage his really strange obsession with miners.

His article will be about miners and how they are destroying Eve. He should change his name to James One-Note.

The self obsessed ego (mittens) and the miner obsessed ego.

Trash article on themittani.com nonshocker.

There's a lot more to it than miners. Set aside your prejudice, hate and preconceived notions and read the article.

Not sure what you mean here. Are you under the impression that once you join a player corp, you can't return to an NPC corp?

You can't return to the NPC starter corp that you started in, you end up in one of what I call the drop-out NPC corps where other ex-player corp pilots go.

You cannot return to your Starter NPC corp as you go to a different one. If you left friends there who are unwilling to move, you cannot return to them.

1)TL;DR
2)Vets whining about eve getting softer.
3)Why do bitter vets care about what happens in high sec?
4)Oh this thread again.

Eh? Wtf are you two blathering about?

What difference does your NPC corp make?

What do you mean by "unwilling to move" and "return to them"? Surely players in NPC corps can go where the hell they like?

Or am I missing something here?

Because we care as the game as a whole, and don't like the overall shift in direction (and audience) ccp is taking?

Go be stupid somewhere else.

>wants 0.0 turned into ****
>wants hisec to be safer

Null is the safest space in the game. I'm not sure what those asterisks are for, but it is the naughty word for poo poo; I will have you know coalitions who's goal is to turn all of null into one giant nap train is what is making null poo poo.

Getting into null is difficult for a new player. Gate camps. The only alternative is using a WH.

Why do bitter vets care about what happens in high sec?

Confirming that Mittens admits openly that BoB fell because someone clicked a mouse button, and not because they were beaten in space.

Finally...

Well first off despite being bitter, we still care about the game. Secondly, plenty of us live in highsec.

Thank you for your extremely enlightened opinion. Some day I wish do be as intelligent as you. You are the reason newer players leave eve. Eve is linear in such a way as to encourage progression. Normally you start in high sec, move to low sec, go to WH or null sec. Instead of belittling the buffing of high sec, maybe you "Vets" should make the other areas of eve more inviting.

I think this is probably the first topic I have created in over 3 years on Eve Forums, but after reading the linked article I came to the conclusion that every single Eve player needs to read it. I would be very curious to hear the opinions on it.

http://themittani.com/features/road-nerfdom-highsecs-carebear-future

there isn't much risk for those who take steps to mitigate it, which is fine

what some people want, however, is to be able to autopilot their officer fit tengus with plex in the hold between market hubs

Suicide ganking is still (and should still) be possible in hisec, however, it was always a semi-broken mechanic that certain members of the eve community took too far and forced CPPs hand into fixing. The way they did it was to balance/buff barges, which also needed attention anyway.

If ppl like James and the gsf gank bounties hadn't happened, it prob wouldn't have been changed.

But at the end of the day, there should be real consequences for "suiciding" yourself, NOT profit, that's just dumb. I never heard of a guy strapping a bomb to himself, setting it off and, well, being rewarded with living and also getting given a new 60" LCD tv for his troubles. You are still able to sui-gank, that hasn't changed, but you need to find your profitable hauler ganks etc now, not soft easymode hulk ganks. Or use it as a last resort, or a FU revenge attack on someone who made you buttsore and sadfaced.

Basically the only ppl that are whining are the pathetic players who either made profit from bad game design, or ppl who actually thought it was cool PvP coolness.

Empire is still as unsafe as it was, I'm not sure why the fuss. Sui-ganking is better now imo.

Came expecting link to Poetic Stanziel blog. Not sure if this is better or worse.

TIN FOIL HATS

Yes, my thoughts exactly.

Saw the name - james 315.

Stopped right there.

It is probably best for james if folk do not encourage his really strange obsession with miners.

His article will be about miners and how they are destroying Eve. He should change his name to James One-Note.

The self obsessed ego (mittens) and the miner obsessed ego.

You missed the Elite zone a.k.a. Wormholes.
There are a lot of wormhole systems.

A good real world analogy for suicide ganking:

You are playing golf. Someone runs up to you, shoots you with a Taser. Half your clubs fall into a nearby water hazard and he takes the other half. As a penalty, the police take away his Taser.

Stopped reading when the disgraced lawyer's name came up.

Brick, that doesn't make any sense.

A good real world analogy for suicide ganking:

You are playing golf. Someone runs up to you, shoots you with a Taser. Half your clubs fall into a nearby water hazard and he takes the other half. As a penalty, the police Taser him.

I think this is probably the first topic I have created in over 3 years on Eve Forums, but after reading the linked article I came to the conclusion that every single Eve player needs to read it. I would be very curious to hear the opinions on it.

http://themittani.com/features/road-nerfdom-highsecs-carebear-future

How informed you must be, going through life avoiding the mere mention of certain names. I sincerely hope you do not live in a country that allows you to elect its leaders.

There's a lot more to it than miners. Set aside your prejudice, hate and preconceived notions and read the article.

Eh? Wtf are you two blathering about?

What difference does your NPC corp make?

What do you mean by "unwilling to move" and "return to them"? Surely players in NPC corps can go where the hell they like?

Or am I missing something here?

I would be very curious to hear the opinions on it.

Carebears don't care about the game, they care only about themselves, and they will destroy this game if they get the chance.

Carebears don't care about the game, they care only about themselves, and they will destroy this game if they get the chance.

most people can think for themselves.

Hahahahaha.

Oh wait, you're serious...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

You're just spouting propaganda, good job most people can think for themselves.

Bang that gong, shill, bang that gong.

Am I? What gives you the impression I'm not thinking for myself here?

Well your statement that I refered to is not based on fact. But it is what you would like people to think.

Interesting. Carebears ruined UO, wouldn't you agree?