Not null I can see, but why the repeated ganking?

the magic pink unicorns shooting out of my ass that are equally likely

people who believe they have a right to perfect safety in eve need to be vigorously and violently disabused of that notion

I don't want to be a Tippia in this, but tbh hi sec empires do impose some stuff on their citizens, almost nothing if you are a new or poor man, and more if you have more possessions:

- Being in a empire corp => tax.

- Using a POS => requires standings to the empire and pay charters for the permit.

- Extracting PI => tax.

- Using an office => rent an office and then pay recurring rental fees.

- You must behave else you get policed (Concord).

- You must carry what's allowed else you get fined (Customs).

- You manufacture / research in empire stations => you pay a fee and it's affected by standings with them.

- You trade or issue contracts => you pay a fee.

I might miss some more but that's quite enough of interactions and obligations with the empires.

All the more reason to improve the facilities in 0.0 to support convenience play, so that people who's lives get busy aren't forced to abandon their friends and interests in null.

So unlikely, it's already partially happened. "We didn't want that 3.8k pu megacyte anyway".

Italics are mine, of course. My questions are these:

1) If you truly believe that safe places should have lower rewards, then why should places made safe by players have better rewards? Yes, effort is put in. For that effort, however, you get substantial rewards from your company, and now you're demanding industrial capacity equal to the high sec areas that you claim are broken. Surely you can see why people don't look at it as a fair proposition.

2) There's a thread running through all these posts - one that states implicitly that 'high seccers' don't deserve nor should have the best of anything because of their playstyle/choices. However, no one forced you at gunpoint to move to null sec and join an alliance. Turning the question around, why should my game be changed for the worse because you made what you now must perceive to be a bad choice?

3) My rough analogy to lowsec/highsec is, like most people, the Wild West of the 19th Century versus the populated East. Yes, even in the deepest areas of the Wild West, there were relative pockets of tranquility where people could live much more safely than in the wild on their own. None of them, however, had the industrial capabilities of the East. There was no Piedmont or anything like it in most of the West, and even to this day, more than 100 years after settling the West was a done deal, there are large swaths of the country that don't support heavy industry. Why shouldn't EVE mirror that reality?

A visitor from Japan in the US must obey the laws and pay the appropriate fees and taxes. That doesn't make him a citizen of the US.

let us count the ways in which you are wrong

actually lets not that would take forever, let's focus on the simple one:

"look an ice asteroid crushing manhattan this year is very likely, look it has already partially happened *holds up hailstone*"

Since new players start tagged with a NPC corp of a certain empire, many of them come from a NPC school, they are citizens. Thukker might be borderline but all the others are quite established as citizens.

Alright, so, here's what I've gotten out of the last few pages of this thread: The issue with high-sec and null-sec seems to largely come down to industry, namely that it's a lot more profitable to set up shop in high-sec than it is in null-sec. And it is. Like Tyberious, I'm going to produce a list of reasons why industry is so much better in high-sec and why you can't do anything about it.

1) Expectations. Industry, for a lot of null alliances, is a dirty word. If you're not out there in the fleet in a PvP ship you're useless deadweight to them.

2) Logistics. High-sec has more people running around in it and has much more solidly-established trade hubs than anywhere else in the game, and to an industrial pilot this is important.

3) Unacceptable Risk. Industry is not the most profitable thing in the game, especially not compared to things like market trading, scamming, incursions, or null-sec anomaly farming. Yet the tools an industrialist needs to set up an empire, namely mining barges, exhumers, freighters, and industrial command ships, are among the most expensive and fragile things in the game.

4) Profit. This is always what it ultimately comes down to. People in null-sec, in my experience, don't like paying a lot more than Jita prices for anything.

And this is a problem you're never going to be able to fix with mechanical nerfs to high-sec. Either you need to make it easier to set up operations in null-sec or lose the stigma against non-PvP pilots and actually help them get set up out there. Otherwise no matter what you do you'll just make industry across all of EVE harder, which raises the prices on everything you have to import while making it no more available than it already is.

Highsec offers citizenship.

These bad nullsec alliances do not. They are simply a large group of pirates. If they would actually use their 'empire' for something and create content maybe people would be more easily persuaded into venturing out there.



But no. Conquer all of nullsec. Do absolutely nothing with it. Cry about nerfing hisec.

Stay classy, nullbears

A better analogy is HighSec is europe and Null is the american colonies, why should the colonies not be allowed to build an industrial base if they went through the pain and difficulty of a revolution? (Though I think in general real world analogies should be avoided).

Thanks and I look forward to a reply.

I think a lot of the debate has shifted to how to improve null, and that will require a lot more than a highsec nerf (and that nerf may not even be necessary).

I think a more fitting analogy would be with Australia, as it's so much secluded and resources rich.

There was another space based nice game, actually it was a lovely Star Wars RTS (including player vs player) where you'd build your own empire (rebels or empire) on new planets, forge new alliances, instill terror, start awesome big space ships fleet battles etc. etc.
That was a nice, gradual development model. You'd start on new no upgrades planets, they were inefficient and defenseless, it was your task - using limited resources - to make those planets strongs and bountiful. But they would not become powerhouses, they would "just" become as good as the other planets, including the easily defended ones close to your base.

Imo null sec should *start* like it's now (to simulate a newly arrived population) but then allow progressive empire building, unlock production and research, unlock multiple stations per system and so on.

Heck, I even imagine at a certain point it'd be possible to unlock some NPC guards "SovCord" and finally achieve a true *empire* not just a glorified PvP territory.

If EvE was like this, I'd return to null sec tomorrow.

no they're not because bloodline and starter npc corp and the rest are completely meaningless fluff that has no impact on the game or your character whatsoever, quite unlike being a citizen of a country

Heck, I even imagine at a certain point it'd be possible to unlock some NPC guards "SovCord" and finally achieve a true *empire* not just a glorified PvP territory.

If EvE was like this, I'd return to null sec tomorrow.

Also, I have born in a place and got moved at 1 month old, everything was meaningless fluff on me and hand no impact on my life yet I will forever be tagged with that birth nationality.

One thing I would like to point out is in 12 pages there isn't one cogent, well written, argument about why highsec "cannot" be nerfed. I think it has to remain on the table as an option for CCP.

If life in null is now too tough, go ahead and propose a buff.

Thank you all for the input. I am really glad this thread has stayed civil and I've enjoyed reading all the posts (well most of them).

One thing I would like to point out is in 12 pages there isn't one cogent, well written, argument about why highsec "cannot" be nerfed. I think it has to remain on the table as an option for CCP.


I think a lot of the debate has shifted to how to improve null, and that will require a lot more than a highsec nerf (and that nerf may not even be necessary).

At no point should 0.0 become highsec or have automated npc defenses. The need for being able to upgrade local industry and create genuine empires has been written about at length (by me, and others), but it is about giving players tools to create empires and an industrial base, not allowing them to create highsec. NPC guards would never enter into the equation.

Basically a player made empire should be "like" being in hi sec, with the difference that taxes go to those who created the null sec empire and protect it (or made it possible to unlock NPCs to protect it).

How do you implement functional 24/7 player guards if you want a "civilized" empire and not just a glorified PvP outpost?
I did not really love camping gates for 5-6 hours turns back at the time, and we had just to guard 3-4 entrances to *1-2* systems.

yes because irl citizenship matters and eve citizenship does not exist, merely meaningless fluff, just as we told you and you disputed