All this will do is discourage pvp/roaming, promote flying tiny ships that can crash gate, promote cloaking and risk averse gameplay. This won’t make any space more dangerous, it’ll make people fly less expensive things.
On your reply about not ganking and null/low being boring, they aren’t. You just haven’t experienced it I’m guessing. Fighting haulers/miners is PvE, you calculate EHP and execute the plan, there is no (extremely little) outplay possibility.
legit pvper here boiz
I’m not having a go at your killboard in the below. It’s perfectly fine. However, your attitude that there is somehow acceptable and unacceptable types of pvp doesn’t really cut it. It’s all just pvp.
After all, you shoot miners and haulers, mobile tractor units, pods and things that can’t shoot back:
etc., etc., etc.
There’s no such thing as some pvp being good and other pvp not being good. It’s all just pvp and it’s all fine. Your’s is fine, but so is the OP’s.
And the more of it there is, the better.
It is excellent pvp.
There is not much ganking going on more, old day was crazy 
I shoot miners because they keep mining. They can bring any ship they want to the fight. It’s not my fault that they keep bringing a mining ship.
I will admit the content is sometimes a bit boring, but I don’t see anything more interesting in EVE. If you know where better content is, let me know and I’ll head over there. In the meantime, I see nothing but mining ships, so might as well shoot them all. It certainly takes more skill to solo a retriever in high sec, than hot drop it with a fleet in null.
I don’t want to theorycraft a solution to EVE’s many problems, but certainly there are problems. I think there are far too many ways to avoid PvP. Although I do challenge myself against CONCORD, I would like to see some changes to improve gameplay. For starters, of course, the miners should really try bringing a different ship to the battlefield.
Yah, I just don’t understand what the OP was trying to say.
Did you forget to change alts?
You are the OP right?
Is this the elite PvP I’ve been missing out on?
Damn, that was some real teamwork and skill right there.
I gotta get me to null sec where elite battles take place!
Dang! Only 14 gankers to kill a Covetor? How do they do it??
Oh damn, that ret got wrecked by elite nullbear fleet!
This is like pro-level null ganking right here.
I don’t think keeping him out will work.
: - )
I want to ride a Fenrir into glorious combat and this proposal is probably my only chance to do that. I support OP 100%
She was indirectly responding to the OP of the reply-chain. Lord Kalus.
Please stop with this simplistic view of the world.
You’re not a good PvPer, you’re a PvPer. There is no objective good/bad. Even when your killboard is filled with losses, you’re still a PvPer. Someone who only has losses, but has them because he keeps trying to learn, would still be a “good” PvPer simple because he’s trying.
In the end it’s ridiculous to believe anyone can claim what is “good” or “bad”. It’s your personal values (your feelings about yourself) you’re putting in here, which is fine as long as you don’t believe you can declare what is “good” and “bad”, because that isn’t not just wrong, it’s a huge problem.
The problem stems from the fact that you identify with being a “good PvPer”, based on some made up bar you and your social circle (your friends and or the group of self declared “good PvPers”) around you defined for themselves. People like you for some reason never are bad PvPers, btw, which might help you figuring out where your perspective on this is rather simplistic, wrong and problematic.
I can guarantee you that being a “good” PvPer is worthless in reality, because if it wasn’t, then literally everyone, in every game out there, would have the huge problem of being forced to deal with fascist assholes who believe they can declare what’s “true”, “good” and “bad” PvP, who will not - in any way or form - accept anything else outside of their fascist echo chamber.
You would do much better if you didn’t just call it “good”, but actually properly defined what you’re talking about (what you would rather like to see happening more), without talking down on anyone who you perceive as “bad”. Without this underlying idea that you somehow get to declare what is “good” because you believe you are “good”, which automatically means that others are “bad” and thus somehow beneath you. They aren’t.
Less feelings, more rationality.
Thank you very much.
Would you be opposed to the removal of high sec?
Good PvP can be defined.
Its PvP that creates interest and/or engagement on both sides.
I won’t use the term enjoyment because some people will never enjoy loss, but they can be engaged or interested by that loss even then.
Bad PvP creates disinterest instead on at least one side.
Now… Shooting miners is not automatically bad PvP but EVE doesn’t go out of it’s way to engage industrial players in PvP. It does treat them like targets to be ganked, rather than reasonable competators in the sandbox. Some changes have happened here, but not enough.
No, that’s not “good” PvP. That’s PvP that creates interest and/or engagement on both sides. You’re mistaking your idea of what is “good” with something potentially beneficial for our situation. You’re abusing language without even realizing. Not blaming you for it, though.
Anyhow, no, “good” and “beneficial” are not the same thing at all.
No, this isn’t “philosophy”.
It’s science. It’s a way of speaking and thinking that opens the mind and removes tons of problems people in general are completely unaware of, because they believe how they’re doing it “is normal”.
In fact, the vast majority of people have no ■■■■■■■ clue how to properly think, speak and look at the world simply because no one ever ■■■■■■■ teaches them, which causes a lot of problems in our world today.
You define “good” and “bad” here. Maybe a million people see it the same way, but that does not change anything about it. “Good”/“Bad” are man made mental constructs with no actual equivalent in the real world and absolutely not helpful for analysing or understanding anything due to their nature of being subjective.
No, it does not matter how many people agree on it, otherwise we’d run into the “fascist” situation again, where a majority of people get to declare that “[this] is bad because [reasons]” and with that mindset we’re going to run into problems. Hell, we’re already running into problems with it, because assholes dictate politics what to do based on fears and politicians happily take the opportunity to ■■■■ as over just a little more.
“Good”/“Bad” are meaningless, because it does not have any base in actual reality and never actually really expresses what is being talked about beyond some imaginary made up silent agreement about something no one ever actually talks about.
The best part about this is that understanding the world “as is”, using E-Prime, actually removes all the unnecessary complexity and grounds in reality, instead of beliefs.
PS: I am well aware that I am not fully speaking/writing E-Prime all the time, because there are many people who are so bad at comprehending language, they do not actually take me, or anyone else, literally. Another problem, for another thread.
So, yes … certain PvP seems more interesting and engaging. That does not make it “good”, or “bad”, because there’s no such thing. All it does say is that certain PvP seems more interesting and engaging and with that we can work.
With “this is good/bad” there really isn’t much to work with and it only invites haters and people who are required to share their opinions because they’re feeling personally attacked that “their PvP” is considered “bad PvP”.
I need to stop now, because I could go on and on, rewrite it again with more detail, add another three pages of text … oh boy … 
That’s another reason why I’m for the removal of the edit button. 
With all the people on the forums wanting more PvP you’d think there’d already be a lot of willing participants for it!
Why doesn’t everyone who wants to fight meet up in some null-sec systems and fight?
Very happy to see that the recently closed ganking whine thread is being replaced by a constructive thread.
Someone mentioned ganking ventures. It is essential that new players are exposed to the emotional rush of PvP at the earliest opportunity. A hundred, nay a thousand “Your mining lasers stopped cycling because the cargohold is full” just cannot capture the PvP excitement that EVE has to offer. Every miner that quits EVE out of boredom because he wasn’t ganked in time is a loss to EVE (and CCP financials).
Word-of-mouth is one of the strongest forces in advertising. What would encourage more people to play EVE:
Not only is story 2 the vastly better story, it will also appeal to the kind of people that thrive in EVE.
PvP is PvP. There is no good or bad PvP. You mix PvP with “fair” matches. But Eve Online is not about matches!!! Player interaction is PvP.
I’m all for the removal of high sec. Now, there are those who disagree with me, as CONCORD mechanics are the only interesting thing in EVE. It’s fun to watch Orcas explode when they get CONCORDED trying to kill you. However, I do think high sec destroys the rest of the game. The existence of a pervasive safety net effectively eliminates any and all meaningful content from the game. Of course, high sec is not the only problem, but its a glaring problem. It’s only when you can lose it all, that what you have starts to be valuable.