Even better question: What if HS didn't exist?

I see the statement made that "hi sec is not perfect sec" quite often.

What if hi sec were perfectly secure?

I mean no pvp of any type and you were completely unable to harm another player while in hi sec unless there was an active war between your corps.

What would the consequences be? Would it impact the players who live out in Null Sec to any significant degree? Would it impact the players who practice piracy in low sec?

I know it would have consequences for those who like to gank miners and freighters etc in hi sec but what other changes would occur?

I am asking this because I want to know, not because I think this is how it should be. I am curious and looking for an answer.

Pretty quickly, trade hubs would spring up in lo-sec I suppose.

A better question to ask is "why should it be?"

What if hi sec were perfectly secure?

Obviously null-sec needs to get the **** nerfed out of it to fix the game. Anyone that doesn't see this is kidding themselves. All serious EVE economists agree, and most of CCP agrees. Face it zealots.

Obviously null-sec needs to get the **** nerfed out of it to fix the game. Anyone that doesn't see this is kidding themselves. All serious EVE economists agree, and most of CCP agrees. Face it zealots.

The answer would of course be so it did not become a deserted waste land like Null. Where risk vs reward is out of balance.

The monopoly never wanted risk. They wanted a monopoly.

I've always thought, if by some freak of Nature I was ever given a Directors role in GSF, rather than disband them, I'd turn all their blues red and leave.
It would be so much more fun to watch.

I see the statement made that "hi sec is not perfect sec" quite often.

What if hi sec were perfectly secure?

Even better question: What if HS didn't exist?

I mean no pvp of any type

Without high sec there is no null sec without null sec there is no economie in high sec. we are all part of the system get that true your big skull for ones.

We'd just adapt with out highsec. Sure, it would be difficult & strange at first, but the one thing we've always been able to do is adapt.

I see the statement made that "hi sec is not perfect sec" quite often.

What if hi sec were perfectly secure?

I mean no pvp of any type and you were completely unable to harm another player while in hi sec unless there was an active war between your corps.

What would the consequences be? Would it impact the players who live out in Null Sec to any significant degree? Would it impact the players who practice piracy in low sec?

I know it would have consequences for those who like to gank miners and freighters etc in hi sec but what other changes would occur?

I am asking this because I want to know, not because I think this is how it should be. I am curious and looking for an answer.

Without high sec there is no null sec without null sec there is no economie in high sec. we are all part of the system get that true your big skull for ones.

high sec can mean perfect security, no reason it can't. Its a sandbox game.

It's perfectly safe as long as you're in an NPC corp, avoid deliberately pissing people off, never autopilot in your pod and never have enough in your hold/fittings to make suiciding you profitable.

There's also a reason why it can't mean perfect security: because the game would no longer function if it did.

The cargo argument isn't reliable. There are many players who will take a net loss in exchange for a nice killmail.

what a foolish thing to say.

I see the statement made that "hi sec is not perfect sec" quite often.

What if hi sec were perfectly secure?

I mean no pvp of any type and you were completely unable to harm another player while in hi sec unless there was an active war between your corps.

What would the consequences be? Would it impact the players who live out in Null Sec to any significant degree? Would it impact the players who practice piracy in low sec?

I know it would have consequences for those who like to gank miners and freighters etc in hi sec but what other changes would occur?

I am asking this because I want to know, not because I think this is how it should be. I am curious and looking for an answer.

The cargo argument isn't reliable. There are many players who will take a net loss in exchange for a nice killmail. It applies in regards to some but not all.

Tippia why do you even try?

A 25% reduction in active players over the last two years should concern you. (Source: Eve-offline.net)

I've already suggested this. Islands of 1.0 with enhanced Concord and local police around the new player areas. Not because I would like to see it personally, but in an effort to keep more new players in the game.
You can't keep losing players and expect the game to continue. A 25% reduction in active players over the last two years should concern you. (Source: Eve-offline.net)

How can that be a source when eve-offline does not track that kind of data?

Seriously Tippia, you can't read a graph?

Not really, no.

It's a PvP game with two core components GÇö industry and warfare GÇö feeding each other and interacting through a competitive market. Remove one part and the rest become meaningless, and then the game falls apart.

Get off the forums and get a grip. You aren't living in reality. There are plenty of succesful pvp games that have areas of perfect safety.

EVE would fall apart if empire were perfectly safe?


Get off the forums and get a grip. You aren't living in reality. There are plenty of succesful pvp games that have areas of perfect safety.

Its amazing how bent out of shape the cowardly high--sec "pvpers" get when their riskless/brainless "pvp" is threatened and put under the microscope.e Its about time EVE stopped being a haven for cowards who pvp under the protection of concord.

I see the statement made that "hi sec is not perfect sec" quite often.

What if hi sec were perfectly secure?

I mean no pvp of any type and you were completely unable to harm another player while in hi sec unless there was an active war between your corps.

What would the consequences be? Would it impact the players who live out in Null Sec to any significant degree? Would it impact the players who practice piracy in low sec?

I know it would have consequences for those who like to gank miners and freighters etc in hi sec but what other changes would occur?

I am asking this because I want to know, not because I think this is how it should be. I am curious and looking for an answer.

That is why they can not allow you to ask this question, why high sec should be not High Sec.

Actually high sec is in fact, high sec. What it isn't, is perfect sec.

EVE would fall apart if empire were perfectly safe?

There are plenty of succesful pvp games that have areas of perfect safety.

That is why they can not allow you to ask this question, why high sec should be not High Sec.

it is often less High Sec than Low sec or 0.0 sec, if you fly in something that is worth to be sucide ganked or if they have another reason to suicide gank.

lots of yadayada as always

Let me put it this way: High Sec is simply miss-labeled.

you are act as if there would be no destruction if high sec were perfectly safe.

You'd be surprised at how much is lost in Highsec to Suicide ganking and Wars I think. Just consider for a moment, that the largest concentration of ship kills is currently in Empire, and then, that ganker ships are destroyed in the process of suicide ganking.

Freighter gank = ~30 Tornado's, One Freighter, plus any destroyed cargo and modules = ~3.1 billion to any possible amount that can fit in the hold of that freighter plus all modules and cargo on involved ships. Minimum, about a 3 billion ISK, (based on market), loss.

I'm basing that entirely on the fact that I've heard from various sources that it takes ~30 Tornados to guarantee a gank on a Freighter.

Hulks run ~ 150 million plus mods.

My last BS loss in Jita was a Hyperion and netted about 290 million for modules and ship. I built it myself, so the real loss there was the minerals taken off the market to make it and the modules someone else put on the market which I bought and fit it with.

Recently, I'd say that a large portion of these losses has been in Highsec. Either way, I don't want to see Highsec any safer than it currently is or will be or not be in Retribution. This as a player who doesn't Pirate or gank and never has.

I'm also acting as disallowing players to do what they want to each other in a multiplayer sandbox makes it a singleplayer sandbox, which means it's no longer the same game. Again, X-¦ springs to mind if that's the kind of game you want.

Frankly, EVE Hi-Sec is bordering on being an SP sandbox as it is. Restrictions are rather strict compared to true open PvP games, where the players really do make the game (ok, have a relatively greater impact on it, if you will).

If Hi-Sec were made even safer and more restricted, I imagine the player base would take quite a hit as that would not be what many of us signed up for. Shift in the balance towards a less restricted environment would likely have same results for same reasons, on the other hand.

I'm all for perfect hi sec.

But here are the caveats:

1. NPCs are included in the cease fire, no belt rats, no incursions, no missions in high sec.

2. Asteroids and Ice Belts are also included in the ceasefire, shooting lasers at a rock and eating it like a jar of peanut butter is as hostile as it gets.

3. The only high slot module that can be activated in High Sec will be snowball launchers.

On the contrary, if it isn't made safer and more restricted (in terms of evil ganking and bumping), EVE will die, according to General Discussion.

I see the statement made that "hi sec is not perfect sec" quite often.

What if hi sec were perfectly secure?

I mean no pvp of any type and you were completely unable to harm another player while in hi sec unless there was an active war between your corps.

What would the consequences be? Would it impact the players who live out in Null Sec to any significant degree? Would it impact the players who practice piracy in low sec?

I know it would have consequences for those who like to gank miners and freighters etc in hi sec but what other changes would occur?

I am asking this because I want to know, not because I think this is how it should be. I am curious and looking for an answer.

it is often less High Sec than Low sec or 0.0 sec, if you fly in something that is worth to be sucide ganked or if they have another reason to suicide gank. That is, what suicide gankers live off since many years. Bad documentation of how much security there really is in High Sec. Not much. The KI, which should protect High Sec is too dumb and not effective. Now CCP could program a more complicated, smarter KI for Concord or just try to make it real High Sec.

Do you realize how rare this is?


You should read the second reply to this thread then (Destiny Corrupted's post).

On the contrary, if it isn't made safer and more restricted (in terms of evil ganking and bumping), EVE will die, according to General Discussion.

I see the statement made that "hi sec is not perfect sec" quite often.

believe it or not, some people want to play eve without a bunch of cowardly douchebags ******* with them

A sandbox incorporates all play styles.

believe it or not, some people want to play eve without a bunch of cowardly douchebags ******* with them because they want engage in pvp in low or null where there is risk to them. A sandbox incorporates all play styles. A sandbox doesn't mean a player is alllowed to do whatever he wants to others wherever he wants. More moron logic from tippa of course.

Also there are claims that destruction will stop if high sec is made safe. Are moronic statements like this the only defense to keep high sec abusable by cowards who are afraid to pvp in low and null?

Believe it or not but those players are playing the wrong game. Head on over to hello kitty online. PS sandbox gameplay literally does mean players are allowed to do what they want, including make you cry.

Your tears are delicious

Got rid of a few trolling and personal attack comments. Please keep this civil, guys

believe it or not, some people want to play eve without a bunch of cowardly douchebags ******* with them because they want engage in pvp in low or null where there is risk to them. A sandbox incorporates all play styles. A sandbox doesn't mean a player is alllowed to do whatever he wants to others wherever he wants. More moron logic from tippa of course.

Also there are claims that destruction will stop if high sec is made safe. Are moronic statements like this the only defense to keep high sec abusable by cowards who are afraid to pvp in low and null?

snip.

actually, you are playing the wrong game. There is a game with no safety zones, full loot and it actually takes player skill to play it. Its called Darkfall and I'm sure 95% of these chest thumping EVE "pvpers" couldn't handle that game. I play that game for my pvp fix, the pvp in EVE, by comparison, is just a skilless joke.

Quoted for Holy Truth. DFO is what EvE should have been, plus it's twitchy and bloody. Full loot including your money is always at stake and you also lose all to random NPCs. And those NPCs unlike EvE, are REALLY nasty, they group, they call each other, they hear you and set up guards on top of trees and all that sort of stuff. And no, they don't sit in some pockets like silly sheep, they are all around.

actually, you are playing the wrong game. There is a game with no safety zones, full loot and it actually takes player skill to play it. Its called Darkfall and I'm sure 95% of these chest thumping EVE "pvpers" couldn't handle that game. I play that game for my pvp fix, the pvp in EVE, by comparison, is just a skilless joke. There are sandboxes that dont allow douchebag activity, EVE is becomming one. Change is inevitable and EVE is becomming less and less a haven for the awful "pvper" who has gotten **** on in every other pvp game. see my sig. Your fearful tears are delicious.

actually, you are playing the wrong game. There is a game with no safety zones, full loot and it actually takes player skill to play it. Its called Darkfall and I'm sure 95% of these chest thumping EVE "pvpers" couldn't handle that game. I play that game for my pvp fix, the pvp in EVE, by comparison, is just a skilless joke. There are sandboxes that dont allow douchebag activity, EVE is becomming one. Change is inevitable and EVE is becomming less and less a haven for the awful "pvper" who has gotten **** on in every other pvp game. see my sig. Your fearful tears are delicious.

Quoted for Holy Truth. DFO is what EvE should have been, plus it's twitchy and bloody. Full loot including your money is always at stake and you also lose all to random NPCs. And those NPCs unlike EvE, are REALLY nasty, they group, they call each other, they hear you and set up guards on top of trees and all that sort of stuff. And no, they don't sit in some pockets like silly sheep, they are all around.

What if hi sec were perfectly secure?

I mean no pvp of any type and you were completely unable to harm another player while in hi sec unless there was an active war between your corps.

actually, you are playing the wrong game. There is a game with no safety zones, full loot and it actually takes player skill to play it. Its called Darkfall and I'm sure 95% of these chest thumping EVE "pvpers" couldn't handle that game. I play that game for my pvp fix, the pvp in EVE, by comparison, is just a skilless joke. There are sandboxes that dont allow douchebag activity, EVE is becomming one. Change is inevitable and EVE is becomming less and less a haven for the awful "pvper" who has gotten **** on in every other pvp game. see my sig. Your fearful tears are delicious.

You do seem rather angry. Maybe it's time you took a break away from the game.

Word on the street is that if you loose PLEX in your cargo hold b/c of a highsec gank and the PLEX drops, the gankers get to keep the PLEX but CCP also reimburses the PLEX to the person that dropped it. I'd say highsec is still pretty safe...

Word on the street is that if you loose PLEX in your cargo hold b/c of a highsec gank and the PLEX drops, the gankers get to keep the PLEX but CCP also reimburses the PLEX to the person that dropped it. I'd say highsec is still pretty safe...

Loose PLEX? What is this? Have I been buying tight PLEX this whole time? Is there a better PLEX?

Seriously...that has to be a top pet peeve of mine. I am just glad you didn't try calling someone a "looser".

I have never lost PLEX in a ship before. I am not sure what kind of thought process it takes to come to the conclusion that transporting PLEX in a ship is a good idea. I have also never heard or read about someone being reimbursed a PLEX after losing it in a ship to legit PvP. Got any thread links or article links to back that up?

The Savior of Highsec James 315, in his infinite patience, has taken the time to answer.

That is so wrong on so many levels, if you move plex in a ship and get ganked, you deserve to lose it for being dumb, especially when there's already a mechanic in place that lets you redeem plex from anywhere, even trading it can be done remotely, it's called contracts.

If that's true then shame on CCP for reimbursing a loot drop.