Eve Changes, Part 1: High Sec Validation and Review of recent changes

EVE Technology and Research Center Player Features & Ideas
1

After a few months break i came back to learn that massive nerfs to high sec were exacted by ccp recently. I cannot begin to express how in the wrong direction this is. there is a massive amount of hypocrisy here. On one hand we have people advocating “high sec is safest place there for its income should be low” and on the other hand we ccp saying high sec is the most dangerous place in eve.

High sec must receive changes to progress eve in to the future, and it cannot be undergoing this massive nerfs. I will touch more on the topic of these nefs, but i can say “you really dropped the ball on this one, ccp”.

Making high sec safe again

I am still holding the position that criminal actions should be removed from high sec. No more suicide ganking etc. In addition, i still support that war decs are changed to be better. For example, locking toons to corporations during war. Give them a get out of corp once free a year sort of mechanic, and enable them to leave corps for a stacking isk fee that resets yearly from the date of first use. This should start at 100m isk.

The reason is to many people are using mechanics to circumvent war decs, and its not good for the corporations (mass leaving helps discourage them from growing and being long lasting while filling up the database with names/tickers), which hurts the game (especially retention rates). This needs to go into effect to help validate war-decs and then we need to find a better option to war eligibility, because stations in corp just dont work now.

In addition to the above, high sec still needs some important changes to promote group interaction, like grouping with each other and not having to spit rewards for bounties, or mission completion. Fighting the bots etc could be done by creating new missions, or changing existing ones to require multiple people and balancing those missions around group content, making it un-soloable. For example, looking at incursion time coordination requirements for these 3-5 man group missions.

Additionally, trading is in need of changes to help validate it. It would be nice to have spit up the economy, by shifting some of the null systems into new regions, and making those systems high sec, specifically on the edges of the galaxy. a few systems in paragon soul, a few in drone lands, a few up in tenal, and so forth.

These high sec systems / clusters should have a single gate from other high sec systems so players can jump in 1 jump from domain to the edge of the galaxy for example. This will help shift a lot of trade around the game making logistics much easier for everyone.

Additionally, I still advocate for “max orders per station, system, and region” to be implemented so trade is distrusted through eve again and so that its possible to do the trade buy low and sell high sort of thing like it was originally.

Lastly, it would be nice to see a new game play style involving market shares. In the old days we use to do shares in corporations and people make isk through that but its long been a dead concept. If ccp would take on the objective of making that system a public system (like the new gambling system) in which players could make players buying and selling stocks for the over-all economy (or even each racial economy) it would be a great way to help validate traders existence in eve.

2

All changes here are bad changes. EvE is Everyone Versus Everyone. High security does not mean zero risk.
This is changing every aspect of the game to fit your vision without regard to what people are actually doing, invalidates massive amounts of effort to consolidate markets and setup player stations and stock them to circumvent NPC taxes, etc.

And no sane CEO is going to put out shares in a player run corporation, and any stock market put out will either require such sweeping rules against manipulation as to be useless, or be the largest pinata feasible.

2 Likes
3

Nope, and criminal suicide is not the only form of risk in high sec. I grow tired of the noob criminals in high sec getting fat off noobs claiming that the removing of criminal action would some how kill the game.

Go to real pvp with the rest of us in null, you coward.

People use to do it all the time, but im not advocating this system is player ran, i am advocating its something like the market, but for stocks; your able to buy and sell them and potentially make (and lose) isk. A new type of trading that could essentially be done from anywhere (maybe having skills to make it better).

4

Criminal suicide isn’t, correct. On the other hand, it is a balanced risk which adds to the feel of the game and is perfectly in keeping with the themes, tone, and setting. Same with all of the things you want to change.

And I post on my incursion character because he’s also formerly my fitting posting character, and the one who is most family friendly. I am not so fond of null, because of blob, but I maintain a few PVP characters still, mostly in wormhole corps and/or facwar.

5

Criminal action is not the only type of risk that high sec players can obtain however. incursion players have lots of risk with just the rats, and lose often, It is your criminals that are advocating that suicide ganking is the only risk, and ITS NOT.

So this argument is total trash.

6

I am not a suicide ganker. I am more often their target. Removing all criminal actions from highsec is the wrong answer.

Bringing up incursions as a risk to the incursion FC is mildly amusing though. As is the assertion that only gankers would be against it’s removal. I want the option to use an alt to smartbomb a bunch of pods and frigates if I feel like clearing pods or tackle in a war, bedamned to the collateral. I want the option to do all sorts of things. Maybe repping someone in a duel is worth a scythe to me. This change is anti-sandbox in the extreme, and that is my problem.

3 Likes
7

That is your opinion, and mine is no its not.

I think you got confused with the point that i care about your opinion, and i dont.

8

Hypocritical statement.

So you should be able to do what you want, but the people who want to play and not be bugged by pvpers in high sec should not be allowed to do what they want?

Total hypocrisy. Go to low sec pvp.

9

Citations?

Your very first line doesn’t lead to any dev blogs or patch notes in your post.

2 Likes
10

I can voice my feedback with the same rights as you have to post.

And if my feedback is that the idea is crap, you can listen or not, and if you listen, you can take or leave the feedback. But, you can’t stop me from saying that something is a bad idea, and putting up my reasons as to why these are some of the worst ideas I’ve seen in ages. Worse than my own misadventures with trying to make a balanced Tech3 battleship.

Also, you can. Go find a system with 0 in local, off the trade lanes and you can do anything you want in highsec. But it’s a sandbox, not a private game. It’s also a dedicated PVP game in every aspect.

2 Likes
11

It is receiving a lot of changes.

Highsec is the primary spot the latest content-rich efforts from CCP are taking place! There is a full-scale Invasion going on that will reshape the geography of highsec and bring new opportunities and content. Players can pick a side, and have fun (and get rich) support one of the sides in this war, or capitalize on the upheaval to earn ISK.

It is being brought into the future - as a place with living NPCs, danger and a much more dynamic environment! Exactly what is needed to attract and keep new players.

Also, once this invasion is finished and the new geography settled, I fully expect CCP to introduce their new, revamped NPE system, and new space linked to highsec through these invaded systems. This will hopefully plug some of the gaps the current NPE leaves and set expectations of new players appropriately.

Highsec is changing a lot, and for the better.

Highsec was never safe. It always had criminals and dangerous NPCs. That isn’t going to change, despite your personal opinions.

3 Likes
12

yes but your opinion is total trash.

I think you got confused with the point that you are talking on the forum, so accepting that people disagree with you.

Go take another year long break.

3 Likes
13

you seem to of not played prior to 2005, but ganking etc was not nearly as popular as it is now, and it was not a thing until after 2005. So yes, for the most part it was safe at one point.

It was not until people like privateers found out they could war-dec everything, and people with ravens could suicide gank on the jita gate. After that it became a thing. So lets not pretend likt it was anywhere near as dangerous as it is now, but that is a lie.

14

in the end the rest of us devs that actually know what we are doing ignore kids like you, and for good reason. You all ran to eve claiming its some sanctuary for your egotism, but NOT sorry to say its not. People with your mentality are a dying breed, that will be extinct form the industry in a decade or so, and we the designers will have moved on to a much better way of doing things (like fornite, etc).

I am not scared of people agreeing with me or not, but you guys are scared so much of my positions that you deemed it needed to enter the game and try to “bully” me into leaving eve ( Which also did not work ).

I thikn i will stay right here and keep advocating for removal of criminal actions in high sec. Eventually ccp will say “ok, you know what, lets try it”. Just like i did for years with the “Station camping” you all screamed as “for the betterment of the game!”, and guess what, war eligibility system (which is not perfect) game and actually increased pvp, not decreased it. But i do recall you saying “No! that will be bad!”.

Seems like you guys really just dont know what you are talking about.

15

I call BS.

16

You do that, dont change facts. You are kind like a kid with fingers in ears screaming something hoping it changes the outcome, but it wont.

So you do you slowflake.

17

Fact that is not established is BS.
That’s the definition.

18

if (youPretend) {
_itsPretend = true;
}

you do you slowflake, i really dont care if you believe it or not.

19

Fact that is not established is BS.

That is the definition.

Your claims are therefore BS.

Your personal attacks only show that you actually have no argument, no knowledge of the game.

1 Like
20

It never was.

Especially early on when the game had not been min/maxed and solved players lost ships regularly. There had not been decades of power creep so the NPCs were actually difficult, nor were their solved PvE guides to everything available. There also wasn’t even CONCORD at first, so everything was dangerous and unknown. Eve was not a safe, farming simulator for its first few years. It took over a decade to start to look like that.

This original feel is what CCP is currently trying to take Eve back to. They are mixing things up, introducing new, unpredictable PvE for players to content with, and attempting to make losses and actions more meaningful. They want to make it more accessible for newer players, and yet more challenging and competitive for established players.

Highsec never was and will never be safe. However, I think you may actually see a safe zone for new players free of criminal activity come with the new PvE. My guess is a dedicated starter constellation that new players can learn the game and concepts without being caught up in the real game. This zone will be safe, but it also won’t have anything to farm so it can serve its purpose without hurting the core competitive game of Eve.

So I guess -1 on all these ideas? I mean, they sound like ideas that belong in some other space game, not Eve. They are almost all the exact opposite of what CCP has recently been doing. I mean, there is being contrarian, and then there is just being a troll. If you don’t like Eve, go play that space game you were about to release. This would be a better use of everyone’s time.

2 Likes