Hopefully you will include those that don't in this conversation, or it will turn into a 0.0 mothers meeting...

"CCP" is a slippery concept here. There are hundreds of people who work for CCP. Some of them most definitely see it as an issue.

high sec incursions

The bad part is you probably can;t give us more details than that. Like how big is that "some". If high-sec income was truly seen as a problem, it would of been tackled by a temporary fix until they find a more elegant solution. Right now, nothing is done and to me, that means there is nothing to cahnge because it's how it seems it should be.

'splergelord' must be a great compliment, but can you please tell us what it means

The reason many players avoid low and null is not ISK. What they are avoiding is Adrenaline.

For many people the adrenaline rush feels bad and is something to be avoided. Chribba even said he fells that way in his presentation at Eve Vegas. As nothing in the OPs post was geared to reducing the confrontational interactions of low and null, those who do not like adrenaline will continue to play in high accepting what they can get, or move to a different game. What they will not do is move to low or null. Why would they want to play a game that makes them feel bad for fake space money?

High sec needs to be a viable place to play for players who like a calm easy going area with cooperative and competitive interactions with other players.

Low needs to be a viable place to play for those players who like the adrenaline rush that comes from confrontational interactions with other players.

Null needs to be a viable place to play for those who want to empire build, or knock down.

W fits in there somehow, Im not sure how to word it (and I live there.....).

Ugh. But it's so tedious making the same simple data-supported points over and over and oh look, thread #12,053 just got posted by some genius who thinks his ideas are so amazingly original that he couldn't possibly put them into the existing thread on page 3, so let's do it over one more time.

I know that persistence is an essential component of advocating change, but really there comes a point where it does more harm than good. Is anyone going to change their mind because of this thread? Will a single remotely new or original argument be made? Will any new information that wasn't in the 12,052 other threads on this very topic come to light?

"Nothings being done because there isn't a problem and this is how its supposed to be," not even going to touch how terrible of an argument that is. You're forgetting that there could be gridlock, half wants to change it half does not so both halves are left at a point of indecision.

"CCP" is a slippery concept here. There are hundreds of people who work for CCP. Some of them most definitely see it as an issue.

"Nothings being done because there isn't a problem and this is how its supposed to be," not even going to touch how terrible of an argument that is. You're forgetting that there could be gridlock, half wants to change it half does not so both halves are left at a point of indecision.

Poor sov space literally has nothing that you can't get somewhere else. Nothing at all.

- you can build capitals/supers
- you can set up outposts and deny enemy docking rights
- you can have your name on a system
- you can run regular anomalies and mining sites with upgrades

The issue here is that the half that want to change it are mainly in 0.0 and seem to want to do it to force those in hisec into 0.0. Those in hisec don't want to go to 0.0 and cannot see why their ISK levels should be nerfed to force them to do something they won't do and ruins their enjoyment by making it harder to gain shiny stuff.

If there is indeed a gridlock, then debating it until the cows come home is not gonna change anything anyway and I can tell you the cows are very far from home. Both side dismiss the argument of the other because they see the game as needing to be played "thier" way. "We should not ahve to go to nigh sec to be efficient at makign ISK" and "We should not have to go to low/null to be efficient at amking ISK" is pretty much the same thing in the end and it's what most of those stupid thread end up in anyway.

If CCP is stuck in a gridlock like the forum is, you will have to live with the current way it is.

That's only the case because reward > > > risk in highsec.

- you can build capitals/supers
- you can set up outposts and deny enemy docking rights
- you can have your name on a system
- you can run regular anomalies and mining sites with upgrades

The issue here is that the half that want to change it are mainly in 0.0 and seem to want to do it to force those in hisec into 0.0. Those in hisec don't want to go to 0.0 and cannot see why their ISK levels should be nerfed to force them to do something they won't do and ruins their enjoyment by making it harder to gain shiny stuff.

Aaaaaaand paranoia again! "You just want to make me go to low/nullsec so you can gank me!"

No, they don't. That's just you protecting your golden goose. It's always the same trite and tired response when people tell you that highsec is raking in the cash at an inappropriate level.

So, there are two real possibilities here. Either people who like highsec will stay in highsec because they're cowards and won't go anywhere that doesn't have CONCORD.

Or, they will go because they will only go where the most money can be made, in which case we still need to nerf highsec because the very existence of those people in highsec is a damning condemnation of how much obscene amounts of money can be made there in almost total safety.

So, people who are in highsec now are there for one of two reasons: safety, or money. If they are there for safety, then they won't leave anyway. If they are there for money, that just goes to show that it's too lucrative.

Since we know money can also be made in low/null with the difference really being that it is more dangerous, then the amount of money made in high sec should not really bother you because you would also be making money. The choice of living in dangerous sapce is one players make by themself. If you want non-consentual PVP to not cost you a ship, then you ahve to live in more risky place. CCP made sure that you can also make money in the PVP zones but your own choice mean you have to put more effort into it. Prove to me that the risk/reward ratio is more skewed than CCP intended and I will support your crusade because it will be then proven that the game is not balanced as it should be. Until you can do that, I will go with my own theory of "It's currently implemented the way CCP wants it".

It's not like nerfing the income of high-sec would be hard if they really wanted to nerf it.

CCP have nerfed null income many times but have not nerfed high sec income to match. Over the years this has resulted in an imbalance.

Since we know money can also be made in low/null with the difference really being that it is more dangerous, then the amount of money made in high sec should not really bother you because you would also be making money. The choice of living in dangerous sapce is one players make by themself. If you want non-consentual PVP to not cost you a ship, then you ahve to live in more risky place. CCP made sure that you can also make money in the PVP zones but your own choice mean you have to put more effort into it. Prove to me that the risk/reward ratio is more skewed than CCP intended and I will support your crusade because it will be then proven that the game is not balanced as it should be. Until you can do that, I will go with my own theory of "It's currently implemented the way CCP wants it".

It's not like nerfing the income of high-sec would be hard if they really wanted to nerf it.

if parts of the game are badly balanced.....

Which they arent

- you can build capitals/supers
- you can set up outposts and deny enemy docking rights
- you can have your name on a system
- you can run regular anomalies and mining sites with upgrades

This argument has come up in every single thread Malcanis has just verbally sighed about. "You want highsec nerfed so you can force highsec people into other sec areas." People want to be able to live and thrive in their own areas that's the simple. Its only easy to do this in highsec because its rewarded so well for the risk that is there. I don't see officer/faction fit vindicators as a common site in lowsec, I don't see it in nullsec or wormholes either. The reason for that is its not rewarded enough for people do decide its a good idea to do that.

I'm going to make the claim that the average person has a hard time thriving in their own space outside of highsec so they make alts and sit them in highsec to enable their actions outside of highsec.

That's only the case because reward > > > risk in highsec.

It doesn't matter what part he's talking about. You could easily say it with ships, for instance. If attack battlecruisers are overpowered, whether CCP designed them that way or not, CCP is still wrong.