Where is this complete removal of hisec PvP you seem so angsty about?

It's all there, can flipping pretty much ruined, wars are (probably) going to be changed to consensual, and the mentioned instant concord death ray.

It's all there

I'd say appearing red to everyone would be a boon to people that want highsec PvP. you'd have random noobs agress you.

If only there were areas in the game where Concord didn't exist...CCP should look into that.

I'd rather quit than be in a 2000 man blob.

How many cowards will quit the game due to the complete removal of risk-free High-sec PVP

And now carebears control this thread.

Fixed for ya. No need to thank me.

Is hiding in a fleet 10 times the size of the other not cowardly?

Is hiding in a fleet 10 times the size of the other not cowardly?

Tell us how brave you are can flipping noobs

Is hiding in a fleet 10 times the size of the other not cowardly?

I declare war on other high sec Pvp corporations.

I wont be quitting, i'll just have to focus on suicide ganking instead.

wardec's just caused noobs to hide, now i'll be forced to just not warn them and gank em anyway

being able to fight every idiot that engages you is more pvp than being able to fight one miner. Don't call can-flipping "high sec pvp"

And don't ***** about a "probably" that has NO information yet.

Forums are always so dumb around fanfest -_-

no one since low sec pvp is getting a boost

I'm not saying it isn't, I hardly do that myself. I declare war on other high sec Pvp corporations. It's human nature to play, fight, claw, bite you're way to be the best and win a fight, does that not make everyone a coward?

Eve used to be 95% pvp. Now its more like 30% and falling.

TBH its to be expected. I remember playing Quake... i could fire one BFG round into a room and get 5 kills, people would say "AWESOME!"

After counter-strike came out and brought the children to the internet, you cant even get one kill with one shot (awp) without some kiddie crying and whining about it.

Just so you know, that's not actually true. The human brain naturally nudges older memories to be more positive and nostalgic. It was just the same, but the longer back you look, the fewer annoyances and more positives you remember.

The audience was more mature back then.

No, it wasn't. The difference is rose-tinted goggles and the fact that you were less mature at the time. Relativity, Watson. Also, bear in mind I lived through the exact same era.

You're clueless. Its a known fact that the general population of the internet now has MANY MANY more people then it did before.

You're clueless. Its a known fact that the general population of the internet now has MANY MANY more children then it did before.

In the days of quake it was mostly sysadmins, programmers, and tech 'junkies' who were online. Vast majority of people only had access via their work/jobs for a time.

Dialup acess restricted child's use of the internet because you had to pay-per-hour and most of that time was spent by the parents, not the children. Adult supervision of kids online was much more of a concern. There were no social media sites and it simply wasnt 'cool' to be playing games online. Kids played consoles mostly. Sure, there was the occasional child, but for the most part, it was adults.

Source? Oh right.

Source? Oh right.

Millennials (also commonly referred to as Generation Y and echo boomers) are the first generation to come of age in the new millennium. Unsurprisingly, the internet's role is paramount among the age group's media habits and usage. From shopping to socializing to watching TV, they do it all online.

Virtually all members of this age group are online, and nearly as many are social network users. Millennials are ahead of the curve by almost any digital metric: online video viewing, mobile internet usage, mobile commerce, and location-based services.

Some would quit but more would probably "resub" if they later found out that nobody can make them cry anymore.

http://www.newmediatrendwatch.com/markets-by-country/17-usa/123-demographics?start=1




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_Y#Digital_technology



Sucks when you have a perfectly good "lol u no proof" argument and then someone has to go ahead and dig up the facts for you eh

How many Players will quit the game due to the complete removal of High-sec PVP

Age does not necessarily equal maturity.... I mean we all saw how The Mittini (or however you spell it) acted today.

The real question is, how many thousands of new subscribers would they get by this hypothetical removal?

Mr Epeen

The real question is, how many thousands of new subscribers would they get by this hypothetical removal?

Mr Epeen

There should be a PvE-only shard for eve. I realize it hurts the ability to market eve as a 'single shard universe' but you're going to end up with an 'empty shard universe' once another game with real pvp options becomes available.

Eve's major success was over the openness of its pvp. This is what attracted the vast majority of people to it, and what made eve what it is today.

Now that today is here and its become popular, the new babysat players from other games dont know how to handle the openness of the game, other then of course, whine and complain for CCP to change the rules

World of Evecraft here we come

The real real question is, why can't we have this nice niche game where pretty much anything goes, and send these "new" subscribers to either another game (been suggested), or create a whole new game for them to have an enjoyable experience in (been done)?

A steakhouse suddenly changing its menu to salads might attract a bunch of new health-conscious patrons, but where would all the steak lovers go?

I'm not saying it isn't, I hardly do that myself. I declare war on other high sec Pvp corporations. It's human nature to play, fight, claw, bite you're way to be the best and win a fight, does that not make everyone a coward?

You're clueless. Its a known fact that the general population of the internet now has MANY MANY more children then it did before.

In the days of quake it was mostly sysadmins, programmers, and tech 'junkies' who were online. Vast majority of people only had access via their work/jobs for a time.

Dialup acess restricted child's use of the internet because you had to pay-per-hour and most of that time was spent by the parents, not the children. Adult supervision of kids online was much more of a concern. There were no social media sites and it simply wasnt 'cool' to be playing games online. Kids played consoles mostly. Sure, there was the occasional child, but for the most part, it was adults.

Now days, facebook, twitter, myspace, etc, all attracted children online. iphones and all of that.

There may still be a majority of adults, but there are FAR more children online today then there was 20 years ago.

The real real question is, why can't we have this nice niche game where pretty much anything goes, and send these "new" subscribers to either another game (been suggested), or create a whole new game for them to have an enjoyable experience in (been done)?

A steakhouse suddenly changing its menu to salads might attract a bunch of new health-conscious patrons, but where would all the steak lovers go?

Refer to the subject.

If you are to lazy to check again "How many Players will quit the game due to the complete removal of High-sec PVP"

Just curious.

Refer to the subject.

If you are to lazy to check again "How many Players will quit the game due to the complete removal of High-sec PVP"

Just curious.

Low-sec will still be a numbers-and-capitals game as usual. The last time I went there, I had a guy in a faction cruiser tackle and shoot me with one gun at a station. I targeted him back, and sent a flight of medium armor bots in his direction. The drones weren't even halfway there when he popped the cyno.

Not enough thats for sure.

Real men PvP in 0.0 or Whs

What we're actually doing is removing both hisec and PvP from the game entirely. It seems like the fairest way to solve this problem.

What we're actually doing is removing both hisec and PvP from the game entirely. It seems like the fairest way to solve this problem.

What we're actually doing is removing both hisec and PvP from the game entirely. It seems like the fairest way to solve this problem.

What we're actually doing is removing both hisec and PvP from the game entirely. It seems like the fairest way to solve this problem.

There was no problem. Hisec aggression-mechanics worked fine, it's not the rest of our fault that,

A) Most of these idiot carebears refuse to learn the most basic aspects of the game.
B) The parts of hisec shenanigans that are problems--neutral RR not getting aggro-flagged, dec-shielding, the Orca SMA-nerf--were ones that you still haven't fixed, and/or have actively shat on in the case of the SMA nerf (hisec Orcas only, carriers in losec can still play their idiotic station-games, and do.)

Why don't you just admit that you want to turn EVE into just another generic **** MMO, and have done with it?

It's so bloody obvious, and has been for a long time. Because what I've seen from you in that other thread about this is one of the most downright pants-on-head ******** things I've ever seen from you. And that's saying something.

Lol, someone did actually bite the troll.

Well played Greyscale, 10/10.

just move out of high sec :)... you all should

What we're actually doing is removing both hisec and PvP from the game entirely. It seems like the fairest way to solve this problem.

What we're actually doing is removing both hisec and PvP from the game entirely. It seems like the fairest way to solve this problem.

That means you simply kiling the game

It would probably be better if you'd check the other thread and gave some answers there instead of looking like an idiot in this one.

What we're actually doing is removing both hisec and PvP from the game entirely. It seems like the fairest way to solve this problem.

It's cool, this was just my morning warm-up post

What we're actually doing is removing both hisec and PvP from the game entirely. It seems like the fairest way to solve this problem.

but how many new players will it retain? if you cant pvp in the proper areas (low sec and null) then dont pvp at all..

The proper area to PvP in is New Eden and that is by design.

not anymore...

I, and a significant amount of the people I know, would probably quit, or draw down our account numbers to at best one per player. It really depends on how much things change.

If changes are limited in scope to what has been proposed so far, we'd retaliate by significantly upping the amount of infiltration and in-corp griefing activities to ensure that the amount of accounts CCP loses from our activities completely overshadows the amount of accounts CCP loses from our own unsubscriptions. We'd do everything possible, and within allowed game mechanics, to collect carebear and CCP tears.

If CCP makes high-sec completely nonconductive to nonconsensual player interaction, then most of us would flat-out quit. There would be nothing left for us in this game.

But if you do that, what kind of non-unsafe space would I not have to never visit in order to avoid not being unexposed to non-unconsensual pvp?

If CCP makes high-sec completely nonconductive to nonconsensual player interaction, then most of us would flat-out quit. There would be nothing left for us in this game.

The real real question is, why can't we have this nice niche game where pretty much anything goes, and send these "new" subscribers to either another game (been suggested), or create a whole new game for them to have an enjoyable experience in (been done)?

A steakhouse suddenly changing its menu to salads might attract a bunch of new health-conscious patrons, but where would all the steak lovers go?

Sure, TQ's player count will drop, but at least we'll stop bleeding the players who actually count.

There was no problem. Hisec aggression-mechanics worked fine, it's not the rest of our fault that,

A) Most of these idiot carebears refuse to learn the most basic aspects of the game.
B) The parts of hisec shenanigans that are problems--neutral RR not getting aggro-flagged, dec-shielding, the Orca SMA-nerf--were ones that you still haven't fixed, and/or have actively shat on in the case of the SMA nerf (hisec Orcas only, carriers in losec can still play their idiotic station-games, and do.)

Why don't you just admit that you want to turn EVE into just another generic **** MMO, and have done with it?

It's so bloody obvious, and has been for a long time. Because what I've seen from you in that other thread about this is one of the most downright pants-on-head ******** things I've ever seen from you. And that's saying something.

Geez your clueless. CCP is about making money. If this move attract more salad eaters the steak lovers are the ones who will have to "go to another game"

War declarations are never officially considered griefing and are not a bannable offense, and it has been repeatedly stated by the developers that the possibility for non-consensual PvP is an intended feature.

What we're actually doing is removing both hisec and PvP from the game entirely. It seems like the fairest way to solve this problem.

couldn't care less. ccp could make high sec candy land and only let people with 5.0 sec enter jita. wouldn't effect me or mine.
its a simple business needs scenario. more subs, more conversions, better retention if non-concensual pvp is nerfed. figures.

However, until there's another game that provides the experience I'm seeking, I will fight to preserve this one's core integrity.

It's not a "PVP" when you insta pop an industrial in your tornado, or gank some hulk/mackinaws at belts...

Are you trying to tell us that other players aren't piloting those industrials, hulks and mackinaws? If so the botting problem is much worse than anybody thought.

And now carebears control this thread.

Refer to the subject.

If you are to lazy to check again "How many Players will quit the game due to the complete removal of High-sec PVP"

Just curious.

And now carebears control this thread.

Refer to the subject.

If you are to lazy to check again "How many Players will quit the game due to the complete removal of High-sec PVP"

Just curious.

Better carebears control this thread than newly created alts who's mains are afraid to step up with those mains.

I'm not saying it isn't, I hardly do that myself. I declare war on other high sec Pvp corporations. It's human nature to play, fight, claw, bite you're way to be the best and win a fight, does that not make everyone a coward?

What we're actually doing is removing both hisec and PvP from the game entirely. It seems like the fairest way to solve this problem.

Not enough thats for sure.

Real men PvP in 0.0 or Whs

What we're actually doing is removing both hisec and PvP from the game entirely. It seems like the fairest way to solve this problem.

well after listening to the stream on the subject it seems to me that PVP will become more prevalent, as an example;
NOW- a greifer steals from a can, only that person (noob corp), or fleet members (correct, it's beena while since i been in hisec) or other player owned corp members can shoot the griefer, so weaker corps and noob corp members are pretty much on their own.
PLANNED- if a griefer steals from a can they become suspect and therefore flashy red to everyone, so anyone will be able to shoot them, so i think you'll actually get merc corps prob hired no by weaker corps without having to pay for war decs to protect carebears, carebears in turn will start helping each other and will start gaining experience and that's just a couple possibilities

i think this is actually a good move in the right direction for hisec pvp away from gank to actual pvp, not that ganks wont happen, but it will get more neutrals in hisec to blue eachother because they're helped eachother out when others were in need

good idea CCP Greyscale :)

What we're actually doing is removing both hisec and PvP from the game entirely. It seems like the fairest way to solve this problem.

The only ones quitting due to removing high sec PVP are the pussies who lack the balls to go to the places CCP provide for PVP, you may have heard of low sec and null sec, thats where most PVP players get their rocks off, and not hiding behind concord protection while they cherry pick their targets to dec knowing full well they outclass them in every way for guarenteed easy kills..

People just mad they wont be able to buff their KB with easy kills against non PVP players in high sec who dont know how to shoot back and will be forced to come to low/null and fight other - oh my gosh - PVP'ers who actually can and will shoot you back to the point you return to high sec with your carebear tail between your legs, and eventually - fingers crossed - quit EVE.

TLDR - Cry moar and jog on.

Refer to the subject.

If you are to lazy to check again "How many Players will quit the game due to the complete removal of High-sec PVP"

Just curious.

I thought about it and you know what, I will quit eve because of all high sec crap. And yes I have liquidated all of my assets into isk and I will give all that away in a trade contract for 1 trit. First person to find my contract becomes a lucky (wo)man.

What we're actually doing is removing both hisec and PvP from the game entirely. It seems like the fairest way to solve this problem.

I thought about it and you know what, I will quit eve because of all high sec crap. And yes I have liquidated all of my assets into isk and I will give all that away in a trade contract for 1 trit. First person to find my contract becomes a lucky (wo)man.

So what you are saying is that eve is no longer the MMO to go to if you want open world pvp? Pvp is supposed to be restricted to battle zones with empire acting as a large safe area? Eve is now no different from WOW and any of its progeny?

Sure it is, you'll find what your looking for in low sec or null sec, whichever takes your fancy.

Your mad that your one sided griefing in high sec is coming to an end arnt you? C'mon, admit it ;)


Never played WoW, or any other MMO for that matter, my point of view is a simple one, if people who have busy lives and not much free time to spare to come play eve, and play it just to chill out and enjoy it, than where is the problem with giving them an safe envioroment to do their thing in?
The only people who will be upset with this, is pvp wannabe's who think they're super awesome because they regularly shoot PVE players and carebears who simply dont want to PVP. In their eyes, that makes them elite, and its the fear of them losing their easy button thats making them shake the most.

Sure it is, you'll find what your looking for in low sec or null sec, whichever takes your fancy.

Your mad that your one sided griefing in high sec is coming to an end arnt you? C'mon, admit it ;)


Never played WoW, or any other MMO for that matter, my point of view is a simple one, if people who have busy lives and not much free time to spare to come play eve, and play it just to chill out and enjoy it, than where is the problem with giving them an safe envioroment to do their thing in?
The only people who will be upset with this, is pvp wannabe's who think they're super awesome because they regularly shoot PVE players and carebears who simply dont want to PVP. In their eyes, that makes them elite, and its the fear of them losing their easy button thats making them shake the most.

What we're actually doing is removing both hisec and PvP from the game entirely. It seems like the fairest way to solve this problem.

I, and a significant amount of the people I know, would probably quit, or draw down our account numbers to at best one per player. It really depends on how much things change

If changes are limited in scope to what has been proposed so far, we'd retaliate by significantly upping the amount of infiltration and in-corp griefing activities to ensure that the amount of accounts CCP loses from our activities completely overshadows the amount of accounts CCP loses from our own unsubscriptions. We'd do everything possible, and within allowed game mechanics, to collect carebear and CCP tears

If CCP makes high-sec completely nonconductive to nonconsensual player interaction, then most of us would flat-out quit. There would be nothing left for us in this game.

[quote=Destiny Corrupted]I, and a significant amount of the people I know, would probably quit, or draw down our account numbers to at best one per player. It really depends on how much things change

Fail quote

The problem is i'll suicide gank the bear and then hide in that safe enviroment. Or kill your ship at X and prevent you from retaliating. Or any number of craptastic things that can be done when someone can achieve absolute safety.

The only thing I care about is the open world - sand box aspect of eve. If you take that away by walling off areas and saying "such and such" is not allowed here, and "this and that" are not allowed there -- then eve has been devolved into one of the many other theme park type games out. You kill what was special about eve.

The only ones quitting due to removing high sec PVP are the pussies who lack the balls to go to the places CCP provide for PVP, you may have heard of low sec and null sec, thats where most PVP players get their rocks off, and not hiding behind concord protection while they cherry pick their targets to dec knowing full well they outclass them in every way for guarenteed easy kills..

People just mad they wont be able to buff their KB with easy kills against non PVP players in high sec who dont know how to shoot back and will be forced to come to low/null and fight other - oh my gosh - PVP'ers who actually can and will shoot you back to the point you return to high sec with your carebear tail between your legs, and eventually - fingers crossed - quit EVE.

TLDR - Cry moar and jog on.

Fail quote

Thanks for pointing out that I dropped that Bracket on the way to the Post button. :)

Refer to the subject.

If you are to lazy to check again "How many Players will quit the game due to the complete removal of High-sec PVP"

Just curious.

Edit: I didn't make this thread to ***** and moan about the changes, I just wanted to see and show the amount of the playerbase that would be affected.

What we're actually doing is removing both hisec and PvP from the game entirely. It seems like the fairest way to solve this problem.

IMHO the only people who really, really want PVP in highsec are faggots who are too scared to go anywhere that they don't have the luxery to be completely safe until they pick and choose their unwary targets. As such, and as I never go to highsec anyway because it's literally boring space, they can remove PVP alllllllllllllllll they want. Maybe you should stop being such a carebear and PVP in lowsec.

Pvp in lowsec is all about having more people and more supers than the next guy, by essentially engaging everyone else with twice as many people how are you any better than I. I wouldn't doubt that you are to afraid to undock when local has more neutrals than blues.

Just goes to show you haven't been to lowsec in years....

What we're actually doing is removing both hisec and PvP from the game entirely. It seems like the fairest way to solve this problem.

IMHO the only people who really, really want PVP in highsec are faggots who are too scared to go anywhere that they don't have the luxery to be completely safe until they pick and choose their unwary targets.

Define lowsec for me then. If I were to check your killboard what would I see? All your kills having an extra three dozen people on it, or would I see you solo ganking cyno alts?

Define lowsec for me then. If I were to check your killboard what would I see? All your kills having an extra three dozen people on it, or would I see you solo ganking cyno alts?

If you are to lazy to check again...

IMHO the only people who really, really want PVP in highsec are faggots who are too scared to go anywhere that they don't have the luxery to be completely safe until they pick and choose their unwary targets. As such, and as I never go to highsec anyway because it's literally boring space, they can remove PVP alllllllllllllllll they want. Maybe you should stop being such a carebear and PVP in lowsec.

Now, the mindset is to just whine and ***** about anything YOU dont like to use, and try to take it away from other people too.

[...]

If the war dec changes strike the wrong chord you might not even have to wait til the expansion inevitably bombs out like the worse expansion for a game ever "Incarna" to see the effect.

Without "us" EVE is a crap game with dull pve, long periods of inactivity and mediocre graphics. Though props on the crucible graphics upgrades, they were very nice.

IMHO the only people who really, really want PVP in highsec are faggots who are too scared to go anywhere that they don't have the luxery to be completely safe until they pick and choose their unwary targets. As such, and as I never go to highsec anyway because it's literally boring space, they can remove PVP alllllllllllllllll they want. Maybe you should stop being such a carebear and PVP in lowsec.

Get real for one time in your life, go to 0.0 and live/die there. Then you can talk about pvp and go QQQQQQ. 90% of the "Highsec" PvP players do it for griefing or iskies (And then you complain about isk/h on some aspects of the game). I'm sorry for the legit 10% that just wanted to pewpew in 1v1 duels.

It's a shame that the only thing in this game for you is for you to be able to gank people. It's a chickenshit tactic requiring little skill or bravery and it harms the general player base. People crying about the POSSIBILITY of removing non-consensual pvp from HIGH SEC sound like the punk bully who gets his lawyer Daddy to sue the school because they put him in time out for smacking other kids in the head

I don't want the bully killed. I just want to be able to fight back without the teacher taking away everything that I use to protect myself with. If you give the bully a baseball bat then let me have one as well.

Don't remove Non-consensual PVP but make it so it's not soooooo damned cheap and chicken **** to do.

[...]

I see a lot of people romanticizing null in these threads, saying how it's where "real men" with "balls" go to pvp. That couldn't be further from the truth. Null is severely underpopulated, and sovereignty mechanics create a massive safety net for large-scale pve grinding and botting. Taking a trip through even an NPC 0.0 region, you'll quickly see that most decent systems either have a bot, or are empty. Yes, sometimes there is small-scale pvp in null, but it's not the standard. You guys start a defense fleet against a single guy roaming in a Vagabond, and no matter how much you try to convince yourself otherwise, that is the status quo.

You're interested in fair fights no more than the people you accuse of cowardice. And don't tell me I'm wrong; while I know there are exceptions to every rule, I've sat in the same intel channels that you inhabit now, and have read the same "do we hav enuf 4 fleet??" crap over and over again. Ninety-nine times out of one hundred, your goal in a 0.0 pvp battle is to crush the opposing side with overwhelming numerical superiority. The other one percent of engagements is the occasional "goodfite." Sorry, but not everyone has the patience to sift through the shitpile to find that one golden egg. Maybe if you didn't treat null like your own personal ISK-printing fortress of solitude, then I'd be more inclined to take two or three friends for a roam on a regular basis.

High-sec pvp is but one aspect of my game play style, but it's an important one. Why? Because it's most representative of the sandbox nature of this game. If CCP removes non-consensual pvp from high-sec, I'll leave not because of an inability to get easy industrial kills, but because at that point the game's sandbox nature would have become completely sterilized.

You say you don't want the teacher taking away everything that you use to protect yourself with, but in reality, by supporting this change you're simply asking the teacher to allow you to bring your dad to school so he can beat up that bully.

Refer to the subject.

If you are to lazy to check again "How many Players will quit the game due to the complete removal of High-sec PVP"

Just curious.

Edit: I didn't make this thread to ***** and moan about the changes, I just wanted to see and show the amount of the playerbase that would be affected.

Here's one good thing:

Read post 65 in this thread.

One thing that I think is good is that you can choose--to engage, to not engage, or to just disappear into the crowd:

PvP can be had, more or less on your terms, and on your time--this also somewhat applies to losec--or not, as/when you choose, with friends--3 or 5, not 500+ people you don't even know--as you choose, or not.

HiSec, ideally is arguably the most "sandboxy part of the sandbox, basically, but this is only because you--and everyone--are never 100% safe, even though a more convincing illusion that you are exists.

So what is the real reason you PvP in high-sec as opposed to lowsec? I've heard reasons for why you don't want to go to null. Okay. 0.0 blobs. Is it the same reason for low?

What is it that separates high-sec from low-sec and null-sec? I want to hear what's good about high-sec PvP... not what's bad about the other two.

So what is the real reason you PvP in high-sec as opposed to lowsec? I've heard reasons for why you don't want to go to null. Okay. 0.0 blobs. Is it the same reason for low?

What is it that separates high-sec from low-sec and null-sec? I want to hear what's good about high-sec PvP... not what's bad about the other two.

...

Low-sec will still be a numbers-and-capitals game as usual. The last time I went there, I had a guy in a faction cruiser tackle and shoot me with one gun at a station. I targeted him back, and sent a flight of medium armor bots in his direction. The drones weren't even halfway there when he popped the cyno. I highly doubt this kind of behavior will ever change.

Personally, I wish low-sec would get a nice boost to entice people to go there. I'd certainly like to go back. I just don't expect it to happen.

What is it that separates high-sec from low-sec and null-sec? I want to hear what's good about high-sec PvP... not what's bad about the other two.

CCP's just getting rid of the "If I help my friend, I get blown up but their friend can rep and that's ok?" types of illogic that are currently used as shields by the attackers.

That's a ridiculous claim. What exactly is stopping you from helping your friend? Just start repairing him. CONCORD won't intervene, just like it won't intervene when the flipper's friend provide remote assistance.

I'm not entirely sure that some of the posters in these threads even play this game.

Two remote repaired ships neither of which is going to die, that sounds like fun for nobody. The point is if you flip a can the friend who's hanging around to provide security should be able to blow you out of the sky not just provide a little repping.

I'm not entirely sure that some of the posters in these threads even play this game.

Do I really need to point you to blog after blog after blog with awesome stories of getting missioners friends to blow themselves up when they try to assist via guns? I enjoy tears as much as the next guy but I prefer coherent game design more.

Having to rely on neutral-RR as your recourse to aggression is absurd. The system is being retooled for a reason. That reason is "It is poorly designed and needs to be retooled."

I'm not entirely sure that some of the posters in these threads even understand poor game design when they see it. (See what I did there?)

If that friend is in the victim's corporation, he can.

If that friend is in the victim's corporation, he can.

Why should he need to be in the same corp? Why shouldn't a group of miners be able to have a couple of out of corp PvP alts standing by at a safe spot to warp in and trash a can flipper who wasn't careful enough about checking local?

Because "checking local" is a futile activity in high-sec. The flipper can check however many times he wants, but there's absolutely no way he'll be able to determine with any degree of certainty who the miners' "PvP alts" are.

This is the SAME advice miners and mission runners have been given by suicide gankers. And all of a sudden this advice isn't good?

LOL. Destiny Currupted, you are hilarious!

But, we weren't talking about suicide-ganking before you came along, were we now?

No. We're talking about you, as a hi sec "PVPer" looking for risk-free PVP protecting yourself by checking local.

What has been good for the goose is definitely good for the gander.

Welcome to Eve! Where there are consequences for you actions... Even if you are a grief player.

Because "checking local" is a futile activity in high-sec. The flipper can check however many times he wants, but there's absolutely no way he'll be able to determine with any degree of certainty who the miners' "PvP alts" are.

A perfectly viable defensive mechanic already exists. If miners are interested in defending their livelihood with their "PvP alts," then they are more than welcome to put said alts into their corporations, and have unrestricted ability to protect their property.

When a can gets flipped, the flipper is aggressed against the whole corporation that the can belonged to. This is more than enough.

When you take from someone's can you don't have to wait for the weak miner or his indy corp to shoot back. Someone else can take you up on the offer. You will now be able to PVP. Isn't that what you want?

What's the problem?

Many corps don't take alts.

A quick review of these forums indicates that's not the case, currently can flipping carries virtually no risk and virtually everyone except can flippers wants to make the risk/reward equation less of a no-brainer. If you bait newbies into opening fire in order to kill them don't be surprised if a fair few people think that's just not cricket and will happily gib you in return. Don't like it? Bring friends then, you might actually get some good fights.

[quote=MatrixSkye Mk2]
It absolutely is the case. The risk lies in the exposure to the whole corporation that owned the can that was flipped. If those "fair few people think that's just not cricket," then they're welcome to join those "indy corps" and help protect their assets and operations.

It's not the only thing is this game for me. I've been around since the start (well, just a few months shy of the start). In that time I spent about six years in null and two years in wormholes, and also some time flashy in low, but only until the Capital Age swung into full gear sometime around 2007/2008. I did the whole null thing, and still occasionally go to the NPC areas of null on some characters to **** around.

I see a lot of people romanticizing null in these threads, saying how it's where "real men" with "balls" go to pvp. That couldn't be further from the truth. Null is severely underpopulated, and sovereignty mechanics create a massive safety net for large-scale pve grinding and botting. Taking a trip through even an NPC 0.0 region, you'll quickly see that most decent systems either have a bot, or are empty. Yes, sometimes there is small-scale pvp in null, but it's not the standard. You guys start a defense fleet against a single guy roaming in a Vagabond, and no matter how much you try to convince yourself otherwise, that is the status quo.

You're interested in fair fights no more than the people you accuse of cowardice. And don't tell me I'm wrong; while I know there are exceptions to every rule, I've sat in the same intel channels that you inhabit now, and have read the same "do we hav enuf 4 fleet??" crap over and over again. Ninety-nine times out of one hundred, your goal in a 0.0 pvp battle is to crush the opposing side with overwhelming numerical superiority. The other one percent of engagements is the occasional "goodfite." Sorry, but not everyone has the patience to sift through the shitpile to find that one golden egg. Maybe if you didn't treat null like your own personal ISK-printing fortress of solitude, then I'd be more inclined to take two or three friends for a roam on a regular basis.

High-sec pvp is but one aspect of my game play style, but it's an important one. Why? Because it's most representative of the sandbox nature of this game. If CCP removes non-consensual pvp from high-sec, I'll leave not because of an inability to get easy industrial kills, but because at that point the game's sandbox nature would have become completely sterilized.

You say you don't want the teacher taking away everything that you use to protect yourself with, but in reality, by supporting this change you're simply asking the teacher to allow you to bring your dad to school so he can beat up that bully.

The weakness of the miner and the weakness of his indy corp are their respective problems. The miner and the corporation don't have to be weak; they choose to be weak by not taking safety precautions. Perhaps if they stopped playing the victim card, and started thinking about how to defend their assets, then they wouldn't be taken advantage of. They have the tools, but they choose not to utilize them.

Thats not risk, most of the indy corps have allot of newer players they cant defend themselves from you.
Would be the same if my alliance wardecked and camped you in stations 23/7 you wouldnt be able to do anything because we are simply better, have more pvp'ers and likely more SP.

Mining ships (and to an extent mission/PVE ships) are inherently weak. If you want to mine properly YOU MUST FLY a vastly PVP-inferior ship to do these activities.

Sure, you can give ridiculous advice to the miner, such as mine your veldspar in hi sec with 5 bodyguards (5 players who have nothing else better to do than watch over you while you mine veldspar in hi sec). But then I have to ask, why couldn't you as well follow impractical advice such as scanning an over-populated local for potential threats? Or, you could always go to a hi sec area that isn't as populated to pick your fights against the weak.

Again, what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

If compensating bodyguards is such a problem, keep in mind that mining wasn't intended to be solely a solo activity. Have enough people mining those rocks, and having a bodyguard or two suddenly becomes quite affordable. If you want to mine alone, well, sometimes losing a can to a flipper is just a cost of doing business.

And why shouldn't you be required to bring friends to your grief-capade? Why do you require the miner to bring friends but you can't be bothered to do the same?

If you want to mine PVP alone, well, sometimes losing a can ship to a neutral is just a cost of doing business.

Follow your own advice.

I could be wrong, but can flipping an npc corp can doesn't agress you to the whole corp. It also doesn't carry over to your fleet, which never made any sense to me. If you have 2 or 3 people grinding missions and a ninja salvager comes in and starts flipping, the people in the fleet should have as much right as whomever got the killing blow to attack.