Let me adjust my tinfoil hat first. ;)

:::::runs about his room wailing about how unfair these changes could be to the Carebear population::::::

Readjusts tinfoil hat


~R~

Instead Of nerfing High sec why not just improve the other sec?

Anyway, there's not much to be scared about in that proposal.

Compared to your trolling true.

it'll probably bring about the much-needed death of mineral compression

death2allmineralcompression

Actually, compared to nothing, it's a bit scary, but that's just because 0.1 on the scare-o-meter is scarier than something that doesn't exist.

Meaning, I don't think it will make a difference unless the economic and industrial advantages are worth the loss of ships and cargo to piracy.

Instead Of nerfing High sec why not just improve the other sec? need an alien brain to think ?

Highsec badly needs a nerf. Right now its members have no reason to leave.

As a (currently) risk averse casual carebear I will gladly adapt to whatever nerfs come my way until such time as I quit out of boredom and take my money elsewhere.

I agree, it's simple risk:reward. Highsec must either have its reward nerf, or its risk buffed. So far there hasn't been much in the way of buffing risk, to say the least...

You griefers will whine no matter what changes they make...they will never be "good enough" for you.

I sadly lost my Magic 8 ball app, so I can't tell the future right now.

Any change that is only going to serve funneling targets to people who sit on gates killing everything that moves is not going to be a good one.

Has anyone considered that maybe the reason some people stick to highsec isn't some skewed risk/reward mechanic but rather the kinds of people who populate low/nullsec?

nobody wants to bother running around getting griefed and blown up by gatecamp blobs.

If this is going to be some bad "hurr the road to nullsec is camped EVERYWHERE and YOU WILL DIE" post, don't bother, because it's not the big problem you perceive it to be (or want to portray it as).

Has anyone considered that maybe the reason some people stick to highsec isn't some skewed risk/reward mechanic but rather the kinds of people who populate low/nullsec? It seems to me a lot of people in low and null are crying for highsec to be nerfed not out of some altrustic desire to see the game improved but because they don't have enough targets because nobody wants to bother running around getting griefed and blown up by gankers, pirates, and gate camp blobs. Does that really surprise anyone?

So tell me, will that change with these changes?

In the FW I-hub improvement thread I-hub thread

CCP Ytterbium says, when asked about hi sec stations being too good,:

Q: ONE OF THE REASONS FOR LOW-SECURITY SPACE BEING CRAP REMAINS THAT HIGH-SECURITY STATIONS ARE TOO GOOD IN THE FIRST PLACE, DO YOU HAVE PLANS TO ADJUST THIS?

A: Indeed we do. This topic brought quite an internal discussion, and while this most likely won't be part of a Factional Warfare iteration, we do want to have a look at reducing high-security stations effectiveness to make other areas of space more interesting. Some examples could be reducing refining rates, increasing ISK payment to install jobs. Nothing is set in stone as this is not planned for the immediate future however. Another good idea we noticed here was to tie high-security tax with the war performance of its related Factional Warfare Militia. So if, by example, the Caldari Militia are losing the war in Factional Warfare, all taxes in Caldari State high-security space could go up to support the war effort.

I know its not near Halloween yet, but I really wanted to get some frights going.

I haven't made up my mind yet wether I like or don't like it yet. Mostly cause I hear stories of when EVE had less players and how awesome it sounded. But who knows, maybe more people would play if this happened. I sadly lost my Magic 8 ball app, so I can't tell the future right now.

What would be ingenious would be if that extra tax actually went to the militia players in some form to make it easier to recover from a slump.

^ What mechanic?

we do want to have a look at reducing high-security stations effectiveness to make other areas of space more interesting.

it doesn't matter how nice you make lowsec, carebears will never go there, they'l just charge more and continue producing in highsec. If they wanted a little risk for a bigger reward, they'd already be in null.

misguided attempts at risk aversion modification...

I guess you missed the whole "hisec has more manufacturing capability in one system than nullsec has in most regions" and "hisec has refining and manufacturing in the same station, whereas nullsec must refine in one system and move to another" tidbit, amongst other details which make doing anything other than reacting and building supercaps in nullsec an exercise in retardation?

So tell me, will that change with these changes?


Go ahead and deny that while I have a beer.

Will what change? The fact that not everyone in nullsec is sitting on hisec->low/nullsec gates 23.5/7 and just salivating for a dumbass to jump through?

Why yes, we'll certainly turn morbidly ******** the instant these changes are implemented. We'll let the rest of nullsec be left completely undefended, because we MUST make sure nobody can get from hisec to nullsec. It's literally the most important thing to do after these changes are put into place.

(You're dumb, and you should feel bad.)

you have heard of cloaky haulers and jump freighters right? Also they're talking about lowsec not null, no bubbles means only idiots jumping into low with no scout or the proper ship get popped by camps, which is a surpisingly high number of people.

Last time I roamed in goon space, there as a ship sitting on a gate, a rookie ship. We popped it, and the capsule just sat there, like a mining bot.

So tell me someone was not on the other end of that gate-watch bot.

Tell me that these won't pop up everywhere.

Any game that required you to get more accounts for certain things looks like a scam to most people. Your "solution" is typical, and well avoided. Sure, you can do XYZ with one account for x, one for y, one for z. Maybe that's OK for you, but people think that's a scam.

Having to pay double the rate just because of people who are going to sit there and kill everything that comes through makes for a crap game.

I see that people are still stomping at the wrong reasons as to why high-sec dwellers will never go to low- or nullsec

I still say that you can rebalance high/low/null-sec income until the world ends, it'd still do absolutely nothing to improve the situation.

Has anyone considered that maybe the reason some people stick to highsec isn't some skewed risk/reward mechanic but rather the kinds of people who populate low/nullsec? It seems to me a lot of people in low and null are crying for highsec to be nerfed not out of some altrustic desire to see the game improved but because they don't have enough targets because nobody wants to bother running around getting griefed and blown up by gankers, pirates, and gate camp blobs. Does that really surprise anyone?

Any game that required you to get more accounts for certain things looks like a scam to most people. Your "solution" is typical, and well avoided. Sure, you can do XYZ with one account for x, one for y, one for z. Maybe that's OK for you, but people think that's a scam.

Having to pay double the rate just because of people who are going to sit there and kill everything that comes through makes for a crap game.

I see that people are still stomping at the wrong reasons as to why high-sec dwellers will never go to low- or nullsec

I still say that you can rebalance high/low/null-sec income until the world ends, it'd still do absolutely nothing to improve the situation.

Because it leads to power creep.

Nerfs are often far better a tool to fix imbalances than buffs.

Anyway, there's not much to be scared about in that proposal.

this

Agree, without thinking to hard on it, cuz I'm drunk and i hate thinking, you can build supers in null, sweet! i want that go there, there is no difference in what you can build in low vs high. T2 only built in low? No then my precious absos and astartes would cost like 500 mil at least. ok so some other processes/ research/ reactions that can only be done in low? Drat that still makes all my t2 hulls cost a ton...meh don't care, more business clearing towers and more wardec contracts. I'm in.

Instead Of nerfing High sec why not just improve the other sec? need an alien brain to think ?

Increase the refine yield in POS , in station in low en Null sec , Put some natural phenomenas .. like making the astroids more friable in Low sec or null sec or W-space more friable === more yield

and remove ability to set pos in High sec ... or increase the drawbacks ( more fuel to use in High sec or less in low /null W-space.

too much ways i stop here!!

Highsec desperately needs to be nerfed, while lowsec and nullsec should be buffed. That's just common sense.

Nerf everything I say. How about turning concord off for a week, let's see what'll happen then. Or vice versa, Concord everywhere. Let's go bonkers.

I really don't understand why CCP has a priority to force people out of high sec.

Prices in high-sec go up, prices overall go up?

Meaning, I don't think it will make a difference unless the economic and industrial advantages are worth the loss of ships and cargo to piracy. (edit: Assuming they tweak the stations/costs to encourage people to use the "better"low-sec stations.)


edit: Although the losing FW == increased taxes is not a bad idea, IMO.

Which changes has CCP made to "force people out of hisec"?

Now, a hisec representative would probably just end up going "well, nerf JFs, that way it'll be less effort to build it in nullsec", and he'd still probably miss out on the whole issue with deklein having less industrial capacity than a fair bit of the hisec systems in the game as it is, or he'd go "hurr durr put up POSes to expand your industrial capacity", completely ignoring the fact that POS-based manufacturing is a cockstab of epic proportions (and I commend the WH guys for putting up with it, but I don't think they have that much choice), it's a huge security risk for everyone involved, it's a drain on isotopes (which, again, must come from somewhere), etc etc etc.

Its not about FORCING people out, its the fact theres not enough fun and profitable things to do outside of high sec, they are not dangling enough "reward" for the perceived risk to entice the 100,000's in high sec to try something else!

Its not about FORCING people out, its the fact theres not enough fun and profitable things to do outside of high sec, they (ccp) are not dangling enough "reward" for the perceived risk to entice the 100,000's in high sec to try something else!

Question time: What are the incentives, right now, for anyone to go outside of hisec to do anything?

Question time: What are the incentives, right now, for anyone to go outside of hisec to do anything?

Question time: What are the incentives, right now, for anyone to go outside of hisec to do anything?

Instead Of nerfing High sec why not just improve the other sec? need an alien brain to think ?

just put a 50% tax on everything in highsec

mission rewards, bounty, trading - you name it, they tax it

i mean somebody has to pay for the concord service, this stuff isnt cheap

While they're at it they can tax the corp/alliances in 0.0 by 50% to even it up a bit.

People do still shoot people in this game, right? vOv

Better ratting, better missions, better mining, capital ships, engage in huge alliance fleet battles, less or no consequences to attacking someone (as opposed to concord/gate guns in high sec), moon mining, better PI, ME slots, i'm sure there's more.

The incentives are there, people just don't want to bother with the I can be attacked at any moment playstyle of low/null. IT is somewhat an issue of people avoiding the financial risks as well. ALso alot of newer pilots probably don't want to be forced into pvp "fights" were the other pilot has million 20sp and you've just jumped in your first battlecruiser.

just put a 50% tax on everything in highsec

While they're at it they can tax the corp/alliances in 0.0 by 50% to even it up a bit.

Is it just PVP which dissuades people from going to low/null?

No.


Why?

It was a bit of sacrasm in regard to the first quote in this post. After all nobody likes paying taxes.

It just shows the state of this community in this game. Probably one of the worst I've experienced out of 11 MMOs. PvPers and PvEers never mix well, always demanding this or that, PvPers in my experience tend to be the worst as they demand that PvEers have to PvP, whereas PvEers don't demand that PvPers have to PvE.

Is it just PVP which dissuades people from going to low/null?

Except this is a PVP game.

Except this is a PVP game.

I don't see a issue per say with the changes, but the overall mindset is terrible. Nerfing one area to try and incentivise people to go to another isn't going to work, it hasn't before it won't now. Depending on how deep CCP tries to nerf highsec, they will end up losing more then they gain. If CCP is really concerned about low-sec then they need to actually change it to appeal to people, not cut around the other areas to force people to go there.

Pretty much, there's no other real dangers/annoyances in low/null that are any different from high.

Thought it was marketed as a sandbox, guess I heard wrong.

You can't really have the latter without the formerGǪ

You can't really have the latter without the formerGǪ

That is indeed true. The point I was trying to make is that the game has many facets other than PVP.

Yes. Those facets are also PvP, just not of the combat kind.
When people say that EVE is a PvP game, that is what they mean: everything in it is PvP. Not everything is combat (although the game would collapse instantly if combat were removed), but all of it is still PvP in some form or another, and being a sandbox pretty much ensures that it must be that way.

Yes. Those facets are also PvP, just not of the combat kind.
When people say that EVE is a PvP game, that is what they mean: everything in it is PvP. Not everything is combat (although the game would collapse instantly if combat were removed), but all of it is still PvP in some form or another, and being a sandbox pretty much ensures that it must be that way.

I dunno when i was last shooting at a gisti predator i dont think it was human controlled.

...and you shooting it meant that someone else missed out on those bounties and the loot that came with it.

You may have been shooting an NPC, but in terms of the overall sandbox, what you were doing was competing with other players over a limited resource. There's a reason why prime ratting space was a valued commodity in the days of old and why messing up someone else's spawn chain would earn you quite a few harsh words in local/corp/alliance chatGǪ

Tippia is using PVP in the extreme broad sense.

The term PvP has been so watered down by some people it's totally meaningless now. PvP is just seen as competition by some people no matter how benign it is.

Tippia is using PVP in the extreme broad sense. Where even WoW on a PVE server is considered PVP. Any form of competition is considered Pvp however for the most part when you reference PVP it means player ship vs player ship.

So stop nitpicking Tippia.

GǪand you shooting it meant that someone else missed out on those bounties and the loot that came with it.

You may have been shooting an NPC, but in terms of the overall sandbox, what you were doing was competing with other players over a limited resource. There's a reason why prime ratting space was a valued commodity in the days of old and why messing up someone else's spawn chain would earn you quite a few harsh words in local/corp/alliance chatGǪ

I've mined people out of an asteroid belt, but I didn't pit my ship against them in combat. Is that not PVP?

I've driven people out of a market (and I've been driven out of a market) through market fuckery. Is that not PVP?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Player_versus_player

I mean I kind of understand what your saying, but I'm pretty sure the majority of people that play video games see PVP as directly playing against a human oppponent.

I've mined people out of an asteroid belt, but I didn't pit my ship against them in combat. Is that not PVP?

I've driven people out of a market (and I've been driven out of a market) through market fuckery. Is that not PVP?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Player_versus_player

I mean I kind of understand what your saying, but I'm pretty sure the majority of people that play video games see PVP as directly playing against a human oppponent. I'm also pretty sure tha't what James was referring to when he made the post about PVP that I had oringinally commented on.

people will not assume that non-aggressive actions is PvP. PVP is the new term for PK, everything else is just interaction.

Is it just PVP which dissuades people from going to low/null?

I'd say it's the mindless ganking, the vast majority of low-sec inhabitants shoot everything that moves as a low sec-status is fairly meaningless. Istr it being suggested in another thread (sorry don't remember when, where and by whom) to vastly increase the repercussions of a low sec status in some way (I don't recall the details). This, to me, seems like a good move (well, depending on how they go about it) as it will dissuade mindless ganking (witouth making it impossible) and increase real pirating (= blowing up stuff to turn a profit). If you want to shoot everything that isn't blue, W-Space and Null are that way =>

To me low-sec will be worth it when a newbie stumbles his Cormorant in there and the residents there go "Meh, not worth it." over "WOOOOO! FREE KILL!". Otoh someone flying his Domi crammed full of loot around should still get popped without a second thought. That is the "feeling" low-sec evokes with me when I read the description, not the free for all it is now.

Then again, I'm just a carebear that occasionally jumps into W-space, as I feel W-space is worth the risk a lot more than low-sec.

I can farm a group of mobs and force another player out.
I can fly around and mine everything so the other people leave.
I can undercut everyone's auctions.
...In WoW.. Does that make WoW a PvP game?