What are your thoughts on what would happen if CCP finally nerfed hisec?

finally nerfed

It would turn into the stagnant joke that is null. Look at the 24 hour kill stats on the map, more ships go pop in high sec than low. Only real difference between low 0.0 and high is you get to say that 0.0 is yours

I recall seeing that the bulk of killed ships are also made by just a single organisation in highsec.

OP, your current view on hisec is seriously biased.

in fact, hisec is largest constant battleground in new edden. Most of the pirates (true pirates) are in hisec 0.5 because loot from plundering freighters is nowhere near to lowsec plunder.

Yes there are some aspects in hisec that needs to be changed or nerfed. But your proposal is just another "all of eve should be nullsec"


..and its interesting that most of GD threads about "nerf hisec, want moar targets" comes form one year old "l33t PvPers".

Competing games will get a hundred of thousands new players.

Do you have source on this Baltec1? Tres interesting statment if its true.

To go all StarShip Troopers, I would like to know more.

More get killed in 0.0 per head of population than in high sec at any given time and more ships get killed overall in 0.0 than in highsec. I recall seeing that the bulk of killed ships are also made by just a single organisation in highsec

...I just seem to recall that RvB makes up a good percentage of the kills in high sec. ...
.

I don't, I just seem to recall that RvB makes up a good percentage of the kills in high sec.

Actually TharOkha what he's saying about RvB seems rather likely.

Also, don't forget the station game wardec campers.
Their style of PvP is imo not that fun, and hisec mechanics are an important part of why it works so well.

Suicide ganking also has relatively low competitiveness. Most suicide ganks are one sided engagements where the victim cannot really defend themselves.

Just look at the map and "ships killed in 24h". Im not telling that is largest, but larges CONSTANT battleground.

You just provided the proof yourself that more ships are lost in High Sec than in Null Sec. Sure, they aren't all PvP kills, but they are still lost ships. And some of them far more expensive due to high sec bling.

Well, from the looks of things, the tutorials are killing quite a few players

Hello.

My prediction: Suddenly EVE becomes much more fun, and a better game in general.

Bots are no longer worthwhile as they make easy targets for PvPers.
The EVE economy becomes dominated by intelligent humans, not machines or "bot aspirant" grinders.

Due to the rapid deflation of the market, low and nullsec players find it much easier to use ingame methods to make ISK
(as their main competition, the botting/multiboxing afk/semi afk hisec players' advantage has been nullified.)

Solo and small gang pvp can now be found in abundance as there are targets and organisations of varying sizes everywhere.

Politics and the metagame get a lot deeper as even PvE focused gamers would have to consider how other players affect their gameplay.


What are your thoughts on what would happen if CCP finally nerfed hisec?

OP, your current view on hisec is seriously biased.

in fact, hisec is largest constant battleground in new edden. Most of the pirates (true pirates) are in hisec 0.5 because loot from plundering freighters is nowhere near to lowsec plunder.

Because Null never uses frigates for any reason, certainly not Cyno's.....

Anyway, if you want to look at the statistics... High Sec has a higher concentration of PvP kills per system. Since Null is much more spread out.

So the statistics don't support claiming no significant PvP happens in high sec.

Hello.

My prediction: Suddenly EVE becomes much more fun, and a better game in general.

Bots are no longer worthwhile as they make easy targets for PvPers.
The EVE economy becomes dominated by intelligent humans, not machines or "bot aspirant" grinders.

Due to the rapid deflation of the market, low and nullsec players find it much easier to use ingame methods to make ISK
(as their main competition, the botting/multiboxing afk/semi afk hisec players' advantage has been nullified.)

Solo and small gang pvp can now be found in abundance as there are targets and organisations of varying sizes everywhere.

Politics and the metagame get a lot deeper as even PvE focused gamers would have to consider how other players affect their gameplay.

What are your thoughts on what would happen if CCP finally nerfed hisec?

as the act of running mission is tedious to say the least.

Depends what kind of 'nerf' you're talking about.

I actually like running missions. I don't really do it so much for the ISK as I do for the standings.

Actually TharOkha what he's saying about RvB seems rather likely.


Suicide ganking also has relatively low competitiveness. Most suicide ganks are one sided engagements where the victim cannot really defend themselves.

You must be joking. The majority of illegal isk in EvE comes from nullsec, and null is where most isk sellers are based.

Null sov players aren't looking for small gang PvP

You must be joking. The majority of illegal isk in EvE comes from nullsec, and null is where most isk sellers are based. Many nullsec alliances are funded by at least renting space to RMT operations if not operating bots themselves.

Unlike ratting bots, mining bots lower prices and do not introduce isk into the economy, the only people they inconvenience are the highsec miners who aren't botting.

Null sov players aren't looking for small gang PvP, the people who actually are into that know where it's at (NPC 0.0, FW, etc..). Nobody joins a coallition looking for small gang PvP. Nullbears love the blob. They are the blob.

Unlike ratting bots, mining bots lower prices and do not introduce isk into the economy

Talk us through this one..

It's very simple. Ore != Isk. To buy the ore, the isk comes from somewhere else. Isk is only introduced when an NPC pays you for something.
Instead because of the basic supply & demand, mining bots generate larger supply making for lower prices. In saying that, miners are doing better than they have for a while, but relative to T1 Ship prices, Miners income will always be static unless the yield is changed on the primary mining ships. Since T1 ships prices are directly related to mineral costs.

OP, your current view on hisec is seriously biased.

in fact, hisec is largest constant battleground in new edden. Most of the pirates (true pirates) are in hisec 0.5 because loot from plundering freighters is nowhere near to lowsec plunder.

Yes there are some aspects in hisec that needs to be changed or nerfed. But your proposal is just another "all of eve should be nullsec"

..and its interesting that most of GD threads about "nerf hisec, want moar targets" comes form one year old "l33t PvPers".

Majority of the players in Eve are in High.

Majority of those players are there because they don't want to play in 0.0/low/WH. If you force them to many will quit.

Hello.

My prediction: Suddenly EVE becomes much more fun, and a better game in general.

Bots are no longer worthwhile as they make easy targets for PvPers.
The EVE economy becomes dominated by intelligent humans, not machines or "bot aspirant" grinders.

Due to the rapid deflation of the market, low and nullsec players find it much easier to use ingame methods to make ISK
(as their main competition, the botting/multiboxing afk/semi afk hisec players' advantage has been nullified.)

Solo and small gang pvp can now be found in abundance as there are targets and organisations of varying sizes everywhere.

Politics and the metagame get a lot deeper as even PvE focused gamers would have to consider how other players affect their gameplay.


What are your thoughts on what would happen if CCP finally nerfed hisec?

What do you base this claim on?

Open up the star map and select "average players in space over 30 mins" or whatever it says. See where lights up the most. That's a fair indication, if nothing else.

I would have thought it went without saying that most Eve players spend more time in highsec than anywhere else.

[quote=Nevyn Auscent]



Point to me where I claimed anything of the sort. Quote and Link, buddy.
(As a point of fact, I described not one full page ago how one organization in HS had over a quarter million PvP kills last year. I'd characterize that as pretty significant.)

So that's... naught for three. But good hustle.

What do you base this claim on?

Majority of those players are there because they don't want to play in 0.0/low/WH. If you force them to many will quit.

CCP released stats on it at fanfest a few years ago.

If you believe that high sec carebears who don't want to PvP will suddenly start Pvping because you want them to, then there is little hope for you.

EVE's economy runs on consumption (ships dying, modules dying with those ships), and the bulk of that consumption occurs outside of high sec, mostly in null sec. High sec only posters tend to go through all manner of mental gymnastics trying to deny this fact.

Ok according 2011 statistics (pre-suspect flags and killright changes) PVE+PVP

8,2m destroyed ships in HS
4,6m LS
7,6m NULL sec

Yes, majority of PVP deaths are in null and low. But as you said, EVEs economy runs of consumption. And It does not mater if those ships were lost in PVP or PVE.

And speaking of mental gymnastics. If you want to deny the fact that HS drives 40% of EVE economy then you should do some mental exercises too.

The majority of bots I have seen have been operating in null and low sec.

I disagree. I actually like running missions. I don't really do it so much for the ISK as I do for the standings.

As far as the rest of your post. I agree completely.

GǪbut it's not any actual or verifiable data.

Many people do, but thinking it doesn't actually prove anything, and GÇ£go without sayingGÇ¥ is just a different way of saying GÇ£I have no idea and I don't want to find out.GÇ¥

It's not accurate, no. Not even slightly. It's probably not generalizable either.* But it is data, and it is verifiable. Can we pull data off the map? Yes. Highlight to get the average as a number. Alternatively we could measure the diameter of the spheres that represent the averages, or measure the density of the colors associated with the averages using an image editing tool. So data, check. Can we repeat this to verify it? Yes. As long as one person explains their method sufficiently, anyone can do the same.

GǪbut it's not actually measuring what we're interested in. It has to be transposed into something completely different, which means it all hinges on random guessworks about the correlations between what we have and what we want. That makes it unverifiable and not actual data GÇö it's just random guesswork, because that's what the GÇ£dataGÇ¥ creation method consits of.

More get killed in 0.0 per head of population than in high sec at any given time and more ships get killed overall in 0.0 than in highsec. I recall seeing that the bulk of killed ships are also made by just a single organisation in highsec.

Not a single, but a handfull of them at most would be true.

Still when you open map and check number of ships killed.. high sec is MUHC MUCH brighter than null sec is in the periods between wars.

So no.. most of PVP is NOT in 0.0.

Yea, because the FRIGATES getting killed in high sec totally equal the BCs, BSs, caps and super caps that die in null sec. Or did you miss the part about how the most killed ship in high sec mentioned in that DEV blog was the CONDOR? At current prices a single Nidhoggur (the cheapest carrier) kill is worth about 3500 Condors (that's just hull price, i doubt the condor is going to be carrying fighters or has items in it's fleet hanger........).. You kill 14 or 15 carriers in a null sec cap fight, you just killed more value than ALL the condors killed in high sec over a 7 year period.....

There is a reason why the word "delusional' tends to come to my mind when someone says "high sec'.

[quote=Jenn aSide][

Well for such claims you really need to cover it with some official dev statistics (total destroyed isk in hi, low, null per year)
Until then, its just your speculation, because there a lot of Pirate BS losses in hisec that are not in this statistic too (as well as your capital ships)

Now, when i hear "nullsec" (especialy sov null player) the words like "supercilious and uppish" comes to my mind.
I think we-¦re even.

Because while i admit that nullsec drive big portion of economy, you obviously denying the fact that hisec is a big player in this field too. That is the main difference.

Because while Im glad that there are four difference places for different players in EVE (low,hi, null, WH), you obviously disdain everything and everyone except null players.

Hello.

My prediction: Suddenly EVE becomes much more fun, and a better game in general.

Hello.

My prediction: Suddenly EVE becomes much more fun...

In other words, "using math is hard and I'd rather CCP does that for me". Typical high sec attitude.

Nope. i'm not the one ignoring facts here.

Because compared to "not high sec", high sec isn't that big a player. The DEV blog you linked covers a 4 year period of time, in that period of time high sec had less than 2 million pvp kills and a LARGE portion of it's PVE kills were 'gifted frigates' not made by players. Meanwhile in null sec (a place with a FRACTION of high sec's character population) not only were more ships dying, but more of them were actually player made and expensive ships. Nulls sec (followed by low and WH space) is the engine that drives the EVE economy.

...High sec's contribution to the consumption that drives that economy is pitiful in comparison...

I play in all of EVE except wormholes. I am at the moment blitzing missions in Lanngisi. Only people who limit themselves to high sec only see EVE as 4 separate "Zones". The rest of us understand that New Eden is one place.

What I disdain is delusional people who are unable and unwilling to properly interpret data if that data is contrary to their personal tastes or self-interest.

I would rather look at the ratio between ships kills and pods as a way to see if there is a lot of PvP. NPC's do not pod.

And I mean, come on, let's face it; that your game is "much more fun" at the cost of others is really what's important here.

more ships go pop in high sec than low

You think that might have something to do with the fact that low sec and 0.0 are primarily populated by groups who engage in coordinated fleet/small gang PvP and who carefully select their engagements, while high sec is basically a messy, uncoordinated, inexperienced, wardec-centric derpfest?

The only time you can die in highsec (barring the tutorial mission) is if you've done something stupid. If you're awake and aware, it is almost impossible to die.

So all these people who go pop... are asleep and unaware?

So all these people who go pop... are asleep and unaware?

You must be joking. The majority of illegal isk in EvE comes from nullsec, and null is where most isk sellers are based. Many nullsec alliances are funded by at least renting space to RMT operations if not operating bots themselves.

That's more or less what we're trying to find out right? It would only be for that half hour period, but then all data is just a snap shot in time anyway. 'Guesswork' in this kind of form has been used regularly in the scientific community, and can be fairly accurate with smart guestimators. Enrico Fermi comes to mind with the drake equation and his 'Fermi' estimates.

It's why I always encourage any newbies I come across to not mine. You start off with a little scordite here and there, and the next thing you know you're ISBoxing 5 Mackinaws half asleep with one hand in a bag of Cheetos and one hand down your pants.

Well, "awake" can also be attributed to being at the keyboard.

But the aware part, pretty much.

Ask the guys.

I spend very little time up there these days, but I'm willing to wager there is still a good amount of straight-forward PvP going on up there in one form or another.

See, I don't buy the old line that everyone in high sec is getting ganked or dying to rats.

I don't need to ask them.

I've been on vacation irl for a while(cursed in laws paid for the flight so I had no excuse not to go), but when I'm actually at home and playing, I literally spend about 1/3 of my time harassing and killing these people.

I've seen their sickness.

75% of all HS losses are to rats.

That's not an "old line," that's what CCP said.

No, I said to ask the guys who do not mine, not the ones who do.

And if the low/null seccers have a standard vision of their idea of a "carebear", would someone among them describe it ?
So that I can see what I am talking to.

Sure, I'll take a crack at it.

At their very core, the carebear is made of 2 things, that may or may not be in equal proportion.

Those things are Fear and Greed. Greed for assets, always more, always increasing. Fear of real players, who might not have strictly better combat skills, but more importantly have the will and ability to use them.

These two things combine together to create a mindset that quite simply cannot handle loss of the imaginary assets we all play with. But most especially, they cannot countenance that loss coming from another player. This both frightens and enrages them simultaneously, hence the bile and vitriol that comes out of them when they are confronted with loss.

This is called "tears", and due to a segment of the playerbase finding this misplaced rage to be hilarious, the extraction of said tears has become a primary industry in EVE Online. That segment that enjoys the verbal flailing of the carebears even does such things as put their various collections online, sharing stories and trading these tears among one another for amusement.

The carebears are not unaware of this, which only heightens their sense of being persecuted.

But for some reason, their behavior doesn't change. They don't see negative consequences arising as a result of their actions, but instead shift all the blame onto the existence of other players. They are unable to consider that they have done anything "wrong".

Which is why so very many of them are bound and determined to act as though this is a single player game.

They do not understand the transience of the itemization in EVE, they are in a classical MMORPG mindset toward what is called "stuff": you accumulate the best stuff and never loose it.

Beyond low/null seccers' alts, highsec is not populated excusively with carebears you know, there are other kind of people.

Sure, I'll take a crack at it.

At their very core, the carebear is made of 2 things, that may or may not be in equal proportion.

Those things are Fear and Greed. Greed for assets, always more, always increasing. Fear of real players, who might not have strictly better combat skills, but more importantly have the will and ability to use them.

These two things combine together to create a mindset that quite simply cannot handle loss of the imaginary assets we all play with. But most especially, they cannot countenance that loss coming from another player. This both frightens and enrages them simultaneously, hence the bile and vitriol that comes out of them when they are confronted with loss.

This is called "tears", and due to a segment of the playerbase finding this misplaced rage to be hilarious, the extraction of said tears has become a primary industry in EVE Online. That segment that enjoys the verbal flailing of the carebears even does such things as put their various collections online, sharing stories and trading these tears among one another for amusement.

The carebears are not unaware of this, which only heightens their sense of being persecuted.

But for some reason, their behavior doesn't change. They don't see negative consequences arising as a result of their actions, but instead shift all the blame onto the existence of other players. They are unable to consider that they have done anything "wrong".

Which is why so very many of them are bound and determined to act as though this is a single player game.

Try to see Eve Online as a game and not a version of real life and you will be so much less bitter about how other folk play a computer game.

Interestingly, the opposite is actually true.

The "classic" MMORPG itemization is present in EVE. Ultima Online, which many things in EVE were based upon, was the first MMORPG, and it had item loss on death as well.

If you didn't make it back to your corpse, whatever it had on it could easily be lost. Much the same in EVE where your wreck (corpse) has what is left of your ship.

Nowadays, gamers are thoroughly coddled, because gaming became more mainstream. Personally I blame World of Warcraft, although it was really Everquest who started it. However Everquest at least had a fairly hefty death penalty even though it wasn't loss of items. But it was WoW that first started the penalty free death among MMOs. Although perhaps FPS games are to blame, with the whole respawn concept. Idk.

What I do know is that without a sense of loss, the sense of accomplishment is diminished.

I played the first EQ when it went out, not so long ago I played EQ2, the second seemed clearly less punishing than the first.
But beyond that I don't understand what you mean by "accomplisment", what are we really doing here ?
Playing the content of an entertainment product sold/rent by a company from the private sector.

I must admit I don't get what you mean by "sense of accomplishment" in the case of EVE, I feel like CCP employess are the ones doing something truly worthwile by creating then maintaining the game.

Sure, I'll explain. Having a "death penalty" in the game that includes a loss of items creates a sense of loss.

Without loss, achievement is meaningless. If you can't ever lose it, then you weren't in any real danger in the first place. WoW for instance, sure I can kill your character, but all I am really doing is costing you some small amount of time, nothing more.

In EVE, on the other hand, by killing you I am actually taking something away from your inventory, from the things that you own.

That is real loss. And since it's real loss, it's also real gain when you acquire something.

Since you can genuinely lose it, having it and keeping it is an accomplishment, however small.

Sure, I'll take a crack at it.

At their very core, the carebear is made of 2 things, that may or may not be in equal proportion.

Those things are Fear and Greed. Greed for assets, always more, always increasing. Fear of real players, who might not have strictly better combat skills, but more importantly have the will and ability to use them.

These two things combine together to create a mindset that quite simply cannot handle loss of the imaginary assets we all play with. But most especially, they cannot countenance that loss coming from another player. This both frightens and enrages them simultaneously, hence the bile and vitriol that comes out of them when they are confronted with loss.

This is called "tears", and due to a segment of the playerbase finding this misplaced rage to be hilarious, the extraction of said tears has become a primary industry in EVE Online. That segment that enjoys the verbal flailing of the carebears even does such things as put their various collections online, sharing stories and trading these tears among one another for amusement.

The carebears are not unaware of this, which only heightens their sense of being persecuted.

But for some reason, their behavior doesn't change. They don't see negative consequences arising as a result of their actions, but instead shift all the blame onto the existence of other players. They are unable to consider that they have done anything "wrong".

Which is why so very many of them are bound and determined to act as though this is a single player game.

"Lions gonna Lion"

Correct. While highsec may not be exclusively carebears, carebears do almost exclusively live in highsec. Kinda of a square-is-a-rectangle sort of thing.

Hold on a minute guys, I'm getting a lot of replies about how the hisec PvE population will quit.

To me, this doesn't make much sense. There are many other games with a much more focused, sophisticated PVE experience.

Why would many PvE gamers play a game that didn't have much PvE content?

Hold on a minute guys, I'm getting a lot of replies about how the hisec PvE population will quit.

To me, this doesn't make much sense. There are many other games with a much more focused, sophisticated PVE experience.

Why would many PvE gamers play a game that didn't have much PvE content?

Yea, because countless threads about AFK cloaking are constantly made exclusively by hisec careberas

Also i should tell you some funny stories about local emo-rages during our nullsec roams

It's fairly obvious this is a troll thread.

But the same question repeated ad nauseam may deserve different replies in different years.

In fact, we are talking about a special product: a sandbox MMO where players perspectives and game features change over time.

I think a subtle line may be drawn: in the past casual players, "PVEers", "F2P", "competing MMOs" were all mostly uncommon or downright not existing things.

Ask this thread question in 2004... nobody would have really cared about most of the factors above.

EvE was an engrossing, new universe to explore, paying an AAA grade sub (multiple subs strongly encouraged by game design!) were obvious things. A blank slate sandbox universe for everyone so bold to go take it? GOOD!

Then the years passed. The blank slate became less blank. CCP's "greed is good" did not reduce a bit, so the AAA grade sub stayed - they actually tried adding more burdens. But hey, it was still "sub MMOs" and the competition games were something pathetic at best.

More years pass. The blank slate now is definitely well full and somewhat tired. New content trickles in, game is in a sort of "active maintenance mode" where great expansions a la Apochrypha are actually and publicly shunned by the very game designers (don't ask me to go find the precise posts, this is all common knowledge or EvE-Searchable anyway). At least partially F2P games become not just a reality but actually almost the norm. Luckily for EvE, the only competition is called Star Trek Online and similar other poor excuses for MMOs.

More years pass. Game's definitely stale. Some off-springs have grandiously failed or shown tight limits (WiS, PI, Dust itself). News about content are sparse and Fanfest is more of a "good intentions talk room" than something followed by facts.
Sub is still AAA grade though. Notice the (not so) subtle change in demographics: in old times, the concurrent player numbers would slowly rise before an expansion and then would stay strong for a couple of months till the "novelty factor" wore off. Nowadays, players come in relatively late, peak at expansion date and then in few weeks they are back to normal.
This is a sign of overall interest declining. Old players return to see if this time CCP finally implemented something worth playing. But whatever they put in, is exhausted and then those players return doing something else.

In the meanwhile, old competitors like Entropia Online (the "evil brother sandbox" implementing several words including an harsher version of a spaceships sandbox) keep churning out new content. Other games like Star Citizen appear on the horizon. And the worrysome truth is that EvE lived so good so far, not because of it's over-time increasing, unbeatable quality and merits but because the others downright sucked hard.

So, EvE in my opinion is slowly losing grip, slowly losing momentum. It's staying playerbase are less and less fidelized, many look around. It's like a big, fat giant standing on feet of clay.
If CCP will keep doing... nothing new, come something big or powerful enough and EvE is ripe to crash.

The first to go will be the many who developed less ties to the game, those who did not develop massive human networks over the years, those who did not invest years learning the "secrets" of the game in its whole.

Who are those less attached to EvE and thus easier to quit?
Worrysome to say, it's a large amount of players, exactly the profile the OP wants to nerf.

Those who only did casual play, who did not invest their being into the deepest game features, who did not develop years strong friendships. Those who form the "players turnover".

All those bring a sizable income to CCP, but it's not reliable. Keep beating on them and they SHALL move to greener pastures.

After all if some dude for inexplicable reasons finds fun to waste his life shooting red crosses and pays for something I'd not do even if paid for, then let him in peace!

EvE is not progressing at the moment, it's mostly stationary. But anything could tip its direction towards a slow but steady decline.
I am very displeased to see a great game being abandoned like that, but it's not in my capability to add new content or features. All I can do is try preserving it as long as possible and flinging nerfs left and right is definitely not the way to preserve anything.

Hello.

My prediction: Suddenly EVE becomes much more fun, and a better game in general.

Bots are no longer worthwhile as they make easy targets for PvPers.
The EVE economy becomes dominated by intelligent humans, not machines or "bot aspirant" grinders.

Due to the rapid deflation of the market, low and nullsec players find it much easier to use ingame methods to make ISK
(as their main competition, the botting/multiboxing afk/semi afk hisec players' advantage has been nullified.)

Solo and small gang pvp can now be found in abundance as there are targets and organisations of varying sizes everywhere.

Politics and the metagame get a lot deeper as even PvE focused gamers would have to consider how other players affect their gameplay.


What are your thoughts on what would happen if CCP finally nerfed hisec?

Edit:

Hold on a minute guys, I'm getting a lot of replies about how the hisec PvE population will quit.

To me, this doesn't make much sense. There are many other games with a much more focused, sophisticated PVE experience.

Why would many PvE gamers play a game that doesn't have much PvE content?

Hold on a minute guys, I'm getting a lot of replies about how the hisec PvE population will quit.

To me, this doesn't make much sense. There are many other games with a much more focused, sophisticated PVE experience.

Why would many PvE gamers play a game that didn't have much PvE content?

CCP

Do you think making it any more hardcore would attract new players that aren't already playing?

Think about it. EVE is a niche product and is one of the most unforgiving hardcore games out there.

Do you think making it any more hardcore would attract new players that aren't already playing?

Yea, because countless threads about AFK cloaking are constantly made exclusively by hisec careberas

Also i should tell you some funny stories about local emo-rages during our nullsec roams

Due to the rapid deflation of the market, low and nullsec players find it much easier to use ingame methods to make ISK
(as their main competition, the botting/multiboxing afk/semi afk hisec players' advantage has been nullified.)

Because the game isn't all PvP. Refer to recent CSM minutes where they discuss player retention.
The players that stay the best are those who's early time in the game is PvE. People who get into PvP fast often tend to leave fast.

Affinity referred to some recent detailed research CCP has done which indicates that the players who stick around longest tend to do everything, while pure PvE players tend to churn out of the game.

Nice try.

New players can't afford to be able to PvP for long periods of time, they run out of money then they quit because PvP for most players is an isk-destructive activity, and lets face it, some people just don't enjoy PvE. The only way to solve this very real issue is to make PvP more accessible and rewarding, and that might involve rebalancing other types of gameplay (highsec pve) to make it more viable.

If you read the CSM notes you might find something else:

But it wouldn't involve nerfing high sec to do so, as that would be the wrong approach and a very self destructive one for EVE and CCP.

EVE is not hardcore, some of the player base is.

For EVE to be hardcore it would need...oh yes, permadeath.

No clones anymore, period.

And no decrease in training time, of course.

Actually making the T3 skill loss on death apply to all death would make the game far more interesting.

Which,..... actually supports what I said. That the game isn't all PvP. Nowhere did I say that the game was nothing to do with PvP at all. Just that it isn't all about PvP.

So nerfing highsec destroys an area of the game

You can't make PvP more rewarding or you lead to the issue of farming each other for profit using cheap ships. 'I kill you five times, I can buy six cheap ships, you kill me six times, you can now buy seven cheap ships. and so forth'. Which is why FW kills don't pay out more than they do.

And High Sec income is already in line with low, null & WH income in terms of being lower per account in a normal situation.

Op fails to realize that without hi sec all the hi sec players would quit.

Hi sec isn't the safety net to experience so many people presume it to be. The agenda for setting a standard to what is valuable is only conceivable to a selfish nature. Players dont play in Hi sec simply because Hi sec is there. No, Hi sec is there and so these people have been provided the opportunity to play. These two realizations are vastly different from one another. You fail to see how petty your reasoning is when you make the statement "Eve would be a better game without Hi sec and as a consequence be funner." because the truth is Eve would be exactly as it is now within Low/Null sec. Nothing more.

The issue seems to be that even the mere fact that casual players who log on occasionally whilst minding the kids and do some semi AFK mining exist at all anywhere in the game seems to totally ruin the game experience for some people who presumably get off on playing " teh mos' aw3some h@rdcore PvP sp@cegame evah " :D

Maybe we need some sort of rift that permanently prevents travel from hisec to low/null and visa versa and block all communications :D

Then both sides can be naively unaware the other lot even exists.

The issue seems to be that even the mere fact that casual players who log on occasionally whilst minding the kids and do some semi AFK mining exist at all anywhere in the game seems to totally ruin the game experience for some people who presumably get off on playing " teh mos' aw3some h@rdcore PvP sp@cegame evah " :D

Maybe we need some sort of rift that permanently prevents travel from hisec to low/null and visa versa and block all communications :D

Then both sides can be naively unaware the other lot even exists.

I got to page 5 of this thread before I stopped. I'll probably go back and read the rest because I like reading the varying opinions of everyone. It amazes me how vibrant and diverse this community is.

FULL DISCLOSURE: I have been a hisec mission runner for almost 6 years. Tried a PvP Corp for a brief time and found it really wasn't my thing.

I get the impression that CCP, despite the rhetoric of HTFU and dark, cold, harsh, etc. actually, whether intentioned or not, created a game with a broad base of appeal. Nerfing hisec (and guessing from OP who has also sought advice on becoming a "warlord") would lessen that broad base of appeal. To what extent is difficult to say. I grow more and more weary of hisec bears lobbying for changes that only benefit their style of play. On the other end of that spectrum though, I can't appreciate the lobbying for free-for-all PvP in hisec either.

I think that the game has a good balance as it is. I fear that people that lobby for these changes don't consider carefully enough the long term consequences of the changes they crusade for. As an example, years before my time it was possible to tank CONCORD, miners were upset that they were disadvantaged by this mechanic and thus lobbied to buff CONCORD. It was this change that gave birth to the suicide ganker that they now demonize.

I think we all love the game as it is. Occasionally and with varying frequency, something happens that affects us personally and we rattle our sabers in protest without giving a lot of thought to the impetus of the saber rattling. Personally, I have always tried to use these occasions as a driver for change in my play and not in the play of others.

Maybe we need some sort of rift that permanently prevents travel from hisec to low/null and visa versa and block all communications :D

Then both sides can be naively unaware the other lot even exists.

Op fails to realize that without hi sec all the hi sec players would quit.

Hi sec isn't the safety net to experience so many people presume it to be. The agenda for setting a standard to what is valuable is only conceivable to a selfish nature. Players dont play in Hi sec simply because Hi sec is there. No, Hi sec is there and so these people have been provided the opportunity to play. These two realizations are vastly different from one another. You fail to see how petty your reasoning is when you make the statement "Eve would be a better game without Hi sec and as a consequence be funner." because the truth is Eve would be exactly as it is now within Low/Null sec. Nothing more.

Your entire post is invalidated by the fact that nowhere does he say that highsec should be removed.

My prediction: Suddenly EVE becomes much more fun, and a better game in general...

...PvE focused gamers would have to consider how other players affect their gameplay.

I'm curious how you think deflation would happen - making hisec less safe would result in reduced volume of things like minerals. Since most pvp people say that hate mining (so they wouldn't mine), that would mean that demand would increase (more losses from less safe hisec), supply would decrease (less yield/hour from less safe hisec) meaning prices would go up across the board.

Overall, this is just one aspect of your mistaken bad idea.

Your playstyle is still valid. It just shouldn't be as rewarding as it is, because it's causing detrimental effects to the way other people enjoy the game. And a rebalance of this will not destroy your playstyle. The rocks will still be out there. You can still shoot the red crosses.

Yet, most highsec players are not grinding for infinite isk. But just for one reason or another not interested in the other area's of space in a serious way at this point in time.

Think about it. EVE is a niche product and is one of the most unforgiving hardcore games out there.

Wrong.

It's irrelevant that it's causing unspecified "detrimental effects" (it isn't, but that's neither here nor there) to other people's playstyles. Lots of people's playstyles consist of nothing but causing detrimental effects to others.

At best you could make a case that low/nullsec PVE rewards need to be buffed. Highsec rewards do not need a nerf, especially not because they cause "detrimental effects" (i.e. butthurt) to certain playstyles. As was mentioned earlier in this thread, ISK is presently leaving the economy faster than it enters. Significant nerf to faucets would cause deflationary issues.

Prices go up across the board every time CCP adds another risk-free isk faucet to highsec, too.

My prediction: Suddenly EVE becomes much more fun, and a better game in general.

...
Bots are no longer worthwhile as they make easy targets for PvPers.
The EVE economy becomes dominated by intelligent humans, not machines or "bot aspirant" grinders....

The biggest fleets of bots i've ever seen were in null. The total lack of so-called bot hunters there points to the disingenous nature of the pinheads who want to hit non-combat ships in hisec.
Mining and belt ratting bots are and will be safe from your terrible ideas. All of them.

Because treating a video game market similar to the world market and using terminology such as "inflation" to describe an isk pool which was larger today than is was yesterday is relevant.

CCP hired a Ph.D economist several years ago for the express purpose of analyzing EVE economics. He's still there.
I'd say it's relevant.

And said economist made comments in latest CSM minutes. Well worth reading since they disprove any kind of 'inflation' theory anyway.

The biggest fleets of bots i've ever seen were in null. The total lack of so-called bot hunters there points to the disingenous nature of the pinheads who want to hit non-combat ships in hisec.
Mining and belt ratting bots are and will be safe from your terrible ideas. All of them.

...Solo and small gang pvp can now be found in abundance as there are targets and organisations of varying sizes everywhere...

Oh sure. I was meaning those comments are relevant to the whole isk faucets are causing inflation arguments people like to spout off about. When the latest comments he made actually show the average player has less isk, not more.

Oh sure. I was meaning those comments are relevant to the whole isk faucets are causing inflation arguments people like to spout off about. When the latest comments he made actually show the average player has less isk, not more.

I really isn't particularly controversial, unless you're a forums alt who stirs up **** without basis for disagreement, that highsec PVE-only players contribute nothing to the game except their continuous injection of ISK into the economy, causing inflation. They don't produce content. They just leach off what the game provides. About the only positive thing that can be said is that they still pay a sub fee (or buy PLEX which is basically the same).

Because those are nullbears. They're a sub-species.

The nullbear accepts that he may have to leave highsec, but his Fear levels are if anything even higher than the average carebear.

You can name them anyhow you want. They are still carebears and some of their reactions are even more adorable than from those from hisec.

By the way i don't see any differences between flying an expensive ship in "secure" space full of random gankers and flying the ship in deep empty nullspace. (where jumps per hr < 2)

The nullbears tend to not fly bling ships. The falsely perceived safety of highsec makes their particular carebears more daring with bringing out the shinies.

Where did you get this data from? It smells funny.

I, too can provide some anecdotal "evidence" and bullshit to try and make my point. Here watch:

Are 10/10 plexes run in Sentry Domis or Blinged out Carriers and Nightmares?

I know what I see in 10/10 plexes, and it sure isn't T1 BS. But you can bet your Astarte that in every major L4 hisec hub there is standard T2 fit Domis hauling their T1 (and some T2) sentries into missions.

TVP's start mach fit might be expensive. TVP's starter Maelstrom fit however is not. They start with T1 BS's. So, get facts right on that front.

TVP's start mach fit might be expensive. TVP's starter Maelstrom fit however is not. They start with T1 BS's. So, get facts right on that front.

the mach fit is pretty much t2 last time i looked at the mailing list. the bulk of the 1.2bn isk price tag is the hull, not the modules.

The TVP starter mach has tech2 rigs now (and 1 t1 ancillary rig). The hull is only like 800 mil now.

Hello.

My prediction: Suddenly EVE becomes much more fun, and a better game in general.

Bots are no longer worthwhile as they make easy targets for PvPers.
The EVE economy becomes dominated by intelligent humans, not machines or "bot aspirant" grinders.

Due to the rapid deflation of the market, low and nullsec players find it much easier to use ingame methods to make ISK
(as their main competition, the botting/multiboxing afk/semi afk hisec players' advantage has been nullified.)

Solo and small gang pvp can now be found in abundance as there are targets and organisations of varying sizes everywhere.

Politics and the metagame get a lot deeper as even PvE focused gamers would have to consider how other players affect their gameplay.


What are your thoughts on what would happen if CCP finally nerfed hisec?

Edit:

Hold on a minute guys, I'm getting a lot of replies about how the hisec PvE population will quit.

To me, this doesn't make much sense. There are many other games with a much more focused, sophisticated PVE experience.

Why would many PvE gamers play a game that doesn't have much PvE content?

This demonstrates really really well that you don't know what you're talking about lol.

Show me the DED 10/10 that doesn't have a gate so you can get a carrier into it in the 1st place. And a nightmare....in a complex that shoots a citadel torp at you....lol no thanks. What you WILL see in 10/10s are ishtars, Tengus, remote rep domi teams and the like.

Contrast that with the marauders doing lvl 4 missions, or the pirate BS' doing incursions. The "starter' machariel fit for TVP (The Valhalla Project) cost 1.2 bil. The "Elite' machariel fit for TVP only costs about 5 billion isk , that is if you don't count the recommended implants that will run you another 4 billion isk (including the pashan's) that no one in null would DARE have in their clones because of the risk of being bubbled.

And ISN flies noting BUT shiny, my starter vindicator I flew with ISN costs +5bil.

There is a reason where there are multiple high sec incursion communities and not one low sec standing community at all.

You caught me mid-edit. Tried to correct it. Just a typo. Don't get too excited just because you think you have someone to bash.

I see Nightmares running anoms/sigs out here all the time. There is a guy who multi-boxes them. This was my point entirely: anecdotal evidence is meaningless when trying to make broad claims; just like you did.

The fact that there are multiple high sec incursion communities (each of which lists multi billion isk fits including starter fits in their MOTDs, mailing lists and web sites) and not a single standing low sec incursion community is not anecdotal evidence. Sure, people use shiny stuff in null sometimes, but it can't compare to high sec.

For example, a 40 ship ISN HQ fleet costs more in terms of isk than a 100 carrier null sec slowcat fleet..

Apologies for coming late to the thread, but in short CCP have already begun down the road to nerfdom with hisec, as documented in various places from themittani.com to here...

Like the old boiling-frog metaphor, CCP is slowly introducing the nerfs over time, to prevent hisec pirates from 'jumping out of the pot'. But make no mistake, our blood is being boiled.

Nope. They've never produced any data on where players are (largely because they don't have any such data themselves).

I really isn't particularly controversial, unless you're a forums alt who stirs up **** without basis for disagreement, that highsec PVE-only players contribute nothing to the game except their continuous injection of ISK into the economy, causing inflation. They don't produce content. They just leach off what the game provides. About the only positive thing that can be said is that they still pay a sub fee (or buy PLEX which is basically the same).

I think a fairer statement would be that the majority of Eve players are in Empire space compared to other areas of New Eden.

CCP produced population distribution figures in their Q3 2010 QEN released in April 2011. Based on those figures (QEN Q3 2010 - page 13) Empire was home to 86.5% of the population, followed by Nullsec at 11%, whilst Wormhole dwellers occupied the last 2.5%.

I think a fairer statement would be that the majority of Eve players occupy Empire space compared to other areas of New Eden.

CCP produced population distribution figures in their Q3 2010 QEN released in April 2011. Based on those figures (QEN Q3 2010 - page 13) Empire was home to 86.5% of the population, followed by Nullsec at 11%, whilst Wormhole dwellers occupied the last 2.5%.

Quite frankly, considering the fact that PvE players have been and still are complaining about undesired interaction, your comment amount to a pile of BS.

They're just complaining louder.

Honestly, undesired interaction could use a buff. They went too far with Crimewatch and all that other stuff.

I strongly suspect that the "only plays in high sec" type player is a minority (and a disinterested, disorganized minority at that), as evidenced by high sec inability and sheer unwillingness to group together for anything like fighting goons or electing CSMs. In other words, the mythical high sec majority is just that, a myth.

I would go even further. I suspect that the majority of this minority is not coming to the forums to complain about anything (sorry Pipa and Tippia, no hard numbers). Most "only plays in high sec" players either don't frequent the forums or are just as fed up with people complaining and begging for changes to game mechanics as those people who classify themselves as null and lo-sec players.

Most of us high sec players like the game exactly as it is. Most of us don't want 100% safety. We also don't want a lawless suckfest but we understand what this game is and adapt and pilot our ships accordingly.

If you actually played the game you would know about the hundreds of changes CCP has made to the game that inhibited and hindered most facets of hisec.

This is why so many Low and Null Sec players have HS alts to make money with.

This can be fixed in 2 ways:
Make HS relatively less safe (i.e. make it absolutely less safe or make other areas absolutely more safe)
Make HS relatively less rewarding (i.e. make it absolutely less rewarding or make other areas absolutely more rewarding)

And by "nerfing" HS, what effect does that have on low and null sec players using those alts in HS to make money?

I think I get where you're coming from but what is the end result? What is the vision? I guess I would like to know the specifics of how this would be done and to what end?

They start being able to make money where they live.



You should be able to make more money in less safe areas. The whole "higher risk gets higher reward" principle.
There should be an actual decision to make between accepting a lower income in the safety of HS and accepting higher risk in the high income zones of Low and Null sec. Right now, you can get high income and high safety at the same time, so there's no reason to make your income in Null.

And where is the balance point for that? At what point does the income differential actually overcome the desire for relative safety and resulting reduction of effort?

They start being able to make money where they live.

You should be able to make more money in less safe areas. The whole "higher risk gets higher reward" principle.There should be an actual decision to make between accepting a lower income in the safety of HS and accepting higher risk in the high income zones of Low and Null sec. Right now, you can get high income and high safety at the same time, so there's no reason to make your income in Null.

That's a question that can only be answered empirically. Make small changes to the income levels of PvE in both areas then wait and see the metrics. HS is going to have to be nerfed though (primarily l4s and Incursions), even if only because that's far simpler than buffing every other source of income in a balanced way.

HS Industry, on the other hand, needs to be kicked hard. Right now HS offers unlimited quantities of free slots in perfect safety. There is no way to make nullsec compete with that without breaking the game, so it has to be nerfed a lot. (I make my ISK off of HS industry.)

So the idea is to nerf HS because Null sucks? I thought that was where all the awesome stuff comes from. T2 BPOs and crazy profitable ore and such.

I get it! There is too much carrot and not enough stick in HS. I can fly missions all day long and rarely fear for getting my ship blown up. But the connection that I'm still not seeing is why nerfing HS helps anyone. Nerfing HS does not change the fact that Null sucks ISK-wise and no amount of changing HS alone is going to make Null suck any less in that regard.

Nerfing HS (which is the outlying high value area for income) is far simpler than trying to buff every other source of income evenly.

HS is popular because it is better than Nullsec for making money.

I'm not sure this is completely accurate.

I obviously can't speak for everyone in HS but part of the reason I have no desire to head over to Null has little to do with making money.

... and next you will list some successful pure PvP MMOs. Good luck with that.

Hello.

My prediction: Suddenly EVE becomes much more fun, and a better game in general.

Bots are no longer worthwhile as they make easy targets for PvPers.
The EVE economy becomes dominated by intelligent humans, not machines or "bot aspirant" grinders.

Due to the rapid deflation of the market, low and nullsec players find it much easier to use ingame methods to make ISK
(as their main competition, the botting/multiboxing afk/semi afk hisec players' advantage has been nullified.)

Solo and small gang pvp can now be found in abundance as there are targets and organisations of varying sizes everywhere.

Politics and the metagame get a lot deeper as even PvE focused gamers would have to consider how other players affect their gameplay.


What are your thoughts on what would happen if CCP finally nerfed hisec?

Edit:

Hold on a minute guys, I'm getting a lot of replies about how the hisec PvE population will quit.

To me, this doesn't make much sense. There are many other games with a much more focused, sophisticated PVE experience.

Why would many PvE gamers play a game that doesn't have much PvE content?