Ok, put your money where your mouth is.
How much isk will you send me when one of those characters has activity again?
Will you apologize to them for false accusations?
Oh.
Reading comprehension is hard for you too. Not surprising tho.
Ick. Just ick man.
Grampy has 100s allegedly 
1 Like
It is funny that you are whining at me that my advice is “BS”, and then try to roll it back. I have had an experice just like this with another person on this forum who I have not seen post in a while.
As far as high sec ganking goes, if you think my advice is too much to be practical (and therefore make less of an effort) and you have only been ganked twice in fifteen years, then it is only reasonable to conclude that you are saying it is not a problem.
It is weird how you claim that my advice is much more than is needed, and that it is “BS”, and you have only been ganked twice in fifteen years, but you claim ganking is a serious issue.
I am going to assume that you are calling me “pro-ganking” which is silly. I am not for people being “ganked”. I am trying to get people to take the initiative and not be ganked. I am tired of seeing people calling for the neutering of the one thing that makes EvE stand out and fun to play. I am opposed to having the rules changed to make high sec totally safe. It is 98% safe already. Removing the last 2% will ruin the game play of many people, and keep other players from ever having the pressure to improve their game play. It is weird how you try to have it both ways, claiming my advice is too difficult to perform for miners (something that apparently I do more of than you do, as you don’t claim to be a miner) but then you claim that even though my advice is too cumbersome, you have hardly ever been suicide ganked anyways, and yet you claim that it is a problem that needs to be removed from the game.
This disingenuousness of yours is very telling @DeMichael_Crimson.
3 Likes
Lol are you trying to scam me on a public forum?
It could be that they handed them a temporary ban. And they might get active again. Either way, thay all abruptly stopped all activity on otherwise very active killboards. So I think things are pretty clear.
Hahahaha! You funny man. Obvious troll!
Not so false it seems.
Another troll. Do you even know what you’re talking about?
It’s. Kek. Kek is lol in WoW.
Allegedly.
I have a feeling that most of these bleeding hearts don’t actually know why they’re so set against non-consensual PvP. Most of them don’t even actively play, and the ones who do stick to low-intensity, low-risk activities that hardly expose them to any associated dangers. This is why the claims they make to support their platforms are often so wildly dissociated from their alleged personal experiences. At best it’s just a bunch of carryover viewpoints from other games they play, and not anything rooted in any practical considerations as they relate to EVE specifically. Anyone evaluating EVE in isolation should reliably come to the conclusion that there needs to be more war, conflict, and piracy, because that’s what makes the game actually work, but these people don’t practice that sort of critical thinking, and simply let their subconscious take the wheel.
4 Likes
Albion is growing and it has the equivalent of 100% safe High-Sec 
That and ultimately, the only hope of this game is the “One War” promise. CCP’s coming FPS better be a good one and integrated to EVE.
You keep spouting the same thing over and over again, all the while misrepresenting what I actually said. Let’s get this straight, besides being ganked twice in High Sec space, there’s also been over a dozen gank attempts done on me. I never said it was a serious issue, just that it’s an issue.
Contrary to what you say, I have never said ganking should be removed from the game. I believe that the risk vs reward ratio for ganking should be more balanced with appropriate consequences for those who indulge in criminal actions. Now you say that High Sec space is currently 98% safe, if that is indeed the case, then this thread and multiple other threads on this topic wouldn’t be happening. The way it is now, High Sec space is relatively safe for gankers, whereas it’s certainly not safe for average players who are mining or transporting goods.
Now I already said your advice is good info, especially for Low, Null and W-hole space. I also said it could be simplified for High Sec due to the large amount of activity in High Sec systems. Other than that, I don’t see any other reason to continue this discussion with you, especially since we’re definitely at odds about the current state of High Sec space.
2 Likes
For the average player? Yes it’s safe. I’m pretty average and gankers really have no chance against my hauling alts.
The risks are for those at the extreme end of the bell curve in the way less than average category. The incompetent, lazy and entitled ones.
4 Likes
Albion has the equivalent of 100% safe high-sec if high-sec had an income cap of like 2 million ISK per hour.
I think pretty much all of the evil griefers have already stated that they don’t mind if CCP were to implement a zone like that into the game. Minuscule income cap, massive taxes, ship tier limitations, manufacturing restrictions, etc. If people really want that, they can have that. But it won’t actually help with player retention in any way; it will just shift the average player quit rate very slightly toward older characters. Players who are fundamentally against non-consensual PvP won’t commit to a game unless that feature isn’t present, and the existence of a “safe zone” wouldn’t help them in that regard unless the rest of the game is like that too.
6 Likes
Preach.
I have missed these nuggets of chip truth.
Are you new to EVE or
ROFL, the straw grasping is delicious.
I do. Apparently you do not
No, no it isn’t actually. The fact that you don’t understand the true meaning of what you’re saying isn’t surprising. Although I’m sure you actually do and most likely are aligned with that ideology.
You don’t even know who we talking about bruv
I would support 100% safe high sec if it was like that
2 Likes
Yeah I wouldn’t say you’re an average player, I consider you as an above average player…
1 Like
I would be for that.
We can rename the existing High Sec „Yellow Zone“ and keep it as is. Then introduce Eves own new „Blue Zone“ islands where: safeties are perma green, only Level 1 agents are available, only Basic Veldspar ore at best (no veld variants and no other ores, maybe CCP can introduce a weaker veld ore and use that instead), scans are for only Level I data sites (no relic, no gas, no combat, no WHs), combat anomalies are only for Level I of the local pirate flavor. No DED 2-4 (or whatever else is found in high sec). Belt rats are only their weakest form and do not spawn elite drop belt rats. No ME/TE/Copy/Invention/Reaction jobs. Only T1 frigate sized hulls and some select equipment for manufacturing with 50% time penalty and 10% material use penalty. Taxes are 15% in system instead of standard 10%. Including market baselines broker and sales tax (5% increase above „normal“).
This all fits both Eve and Albion’s Mantra about „no risk no reward“
Then indeed Eve „blue zone“ would closely match Albion „blue zones“.
The main problem is that the anti-PvP crowd imagines or wishes the existing high sec as a „blue zone“ which is just comes across as a dishonest comparison between EvE and Albion to push an agenda.
I am particularly for this new „blue zone“ because it will end these silly sorts of ganking debates in a good way: it signals we can cater to anti-PvP crowd by introducing new safer and safer yet less and less lucrative* zones. This preserves the existing playerbase that is OK with PvP and — taking anti-PvP folks at honest face value — should increase retention and player count amongst the anti-PvP crowd. A win win.
* because it isn’t about the money, right guys?
2 Likes
It won’t end. It will change and I can’t be sure how the arguments will change, but I can be sure they will continue.
There’s people out there who always want more. You draw a line, you say they can have this much, they complain they want a little more and you say OK. Draw a new line and they’re happy for a little while until they expand to meet the line, and then the complaining starts again. Move it as many times as you like, the result is always the same.
An Eve blue zone is another line people will be happy to take, but they’ll be looking over it instantly ready to complain about anything on the other side they see and can’t have.
5 Likes
Thanks. As an inhabitant of “lowsec is too dangerous” and recipient of “f*ck you I’m trying to farm here” messages while in lowsec, I’m aware. 
I am also aware a lot of the motivations of anti-PVP folks are to make existing income streams safer and use “player count” and “think of the newbs” as a Trojan Horse for those ideas. I wanted to use the opportunity to take the Albion suggestion at honest face value and elaborate to fully separate the “create a blue zone safe for newbies and extremely low tier / low income just like Albion; and increase player count without sacrificing existing playerbase” from the “make my high sec income even more safe” ideas and await the resounding silence.
Because it’s never about actually keeping newbies nor about increasing player count.
There will be a mandatory Scott alt who replies “I just disagree with your analysis” which is fine, but they never elaborate what that means in terms of concrete mechanics changes besides “get rid of ganking completely”, which at this point is extremely old and tiresome. That horse is beaten dead, rotted, and skeletonized at this point.
6 Likes
That’s what I thought it was after a google search and asking people I know…
Could you enlighten me on what it is and this “ideaology” you speak of is?
This is what I think the 12 Starter Systems should be, to encourage new players to expand out of their Jouvulens and Clellinons. No safety-setting to red, and really poor mining opportunities. I guess you could mine in a blinged-out Orca in 100% safety, but what’s the point if you only make like 6m ISK per Hour? Pretty nice idea buried in all this accusatory nonsense!
No L1s, it can’t be blitzable 
Give only a larger volume but really inefficient form of Veldspar, so the the belts get depleted much slower but there is not much actual impact on the economy if people Orca mine it AFK.
Oh wait, that’s what you said XD
How about just the tutorial sites? No DEDs, no anomalies, no belt rats at all!
The manufacturing process can be easily taking care of by having high taxes and a disallowing of structures. Not even cargo container ads are allowed!
I think this should just be about balancing tradeoffs, so I don’t see a reason why this complicated restriction would need to be added.
If it’s too safe, EVE will lose its appeal. If these aeras bring in just that little bit of extra revelue, it might be worth the effort. The drawback I see with it is that some new players might be initially be scared even to venture into highsec, relegating them to only a few boring tasks before they quit.
1 Like
It has roots in 4chan. That should tip you into what it is handily. I do not wish to spread it even further. Just know his usage of it isn’t by chance and is fueled by malice.
1 Like
25 minutes of google later and all I have to say is God Bless America
Gosh heckin dang why does this have to exist…
Yep.
He knows it don’t mean lol.
I always find it interesting how the anti-ganking crowd seems to be filled with these types.
I’m sure there is a valuable study somewhere in there
Its the whole reason why they are able to claim in one breath that ganking is a big problem and in the next breath claim it has minimal impact. They have to constantly flip-flop back and forth between mutually exclusive views and hope nobody notices. And when people do notice…they have their cry of ‘personal attack’ lined up and ready.
And these people who care soooooo much about noobs clearly don’t care enough to stop their ‘Eve is dying’ doom-mongering that is likely one of the single biggest things that deters noobs.
4 Likes