Make highsec PVE only (player retention)

I have played mainly in nullsec and wormhole space. And currently when I’m helping people in the rookie channel I was actually thinking how much more difficult the game is to understand in the area where new players start.

In null and wormhole space its really simple. Everyone who is not with you is against you. No standing losses, gate gun mechanics, doesnt matter if you are wardecced etc.

In highsec everything is much more difficult and vague. You can hit this you can’t hit that. Getting ganked. Even the name is for a lot people confusing as most think that highsec means save already.

With no PVP except for the war declaration system the game would be much more simple to understand for new players in highsec, where they start.

1 Like

Sure, but in exchange everything more profitable than level 1 missions is removed from highsec. No risk, no reward.

7 Likes

The rewards are already really crap in highsec and theres still PVE. So afk mining in a belt could still get you killed by rats for example. I personally odn’t favor afk gameplay if that is what you mean. But doing a level 1 mission and get 250k reward in the time you can roflstomp a haven is already a really low reward.

Exactly. No risk, no reward. If you remove PvP from highsec then you must also remove all profit. No farming level 4 missions in 10 billion ISK ships with no worries about PvP threats.

5 Likes

I say expand the “rookie” systems where they cannot already be ganked by a few more jumps out, and give them just level 1 agents… if they want to venture out of that “bubble” then they are open to PVP or anything else.

Nice attempt to cover your incompetence/lack of HS knowledge with old “but think about children” trope.

Also removing PvP from highsec has way more negative consequences than you might think (lack of asset destruction > economy stagnation and potential collapse) compared to hypothetical “player retention”.

4 Likes

That would make sense if everyone were kicked out of Highsec after say, 2 weeks. But nah, this is a trash idea.

3 Likes

In general i support the idea of making high sec safer, but i do not approve of fully pvp free. I think the suicide ganking needs to go asap, and war eligibility changes need to be made to remove a corp from being war eligible if they drop a station, as stations make up the heart and soul of a corp in corporate identity, and coming together for a greater purpose.

Finding a good condition for war eligibility really needs to be met, and i am really a fan of the idea of a corporate wide /pvp on option from the ceo, ie by editing the corp into and making the corp war eligible for some benefit, for example removing or reducing station fuel costs or improving its refinement rates, etc

as for the rest of high sec there is some other major mechanically related issues to really bring back things that were lost in time.

missions for starters need to grant all members in the squad the value, instead of split it. This would make income as a group much more effective, and help bolster the demand and reason for existence on mission corps. I believe this change should also effect other parts of eve, for even ratting sites in null. This is vital to the long term health of eve. additionally the base isk values should be raised significantly to a min of 1-2m for level 1 missions, and double each one subsequently after. Combat missions should grant significant more then that value per a level for rats, and trading should grant an equal value in the buy / sell option. Trading missions should be fundamentally changed from hauling stuff to buying and selling.

trading itself will not become validated heavily until ccp dispenses the market trade from jita through out all of eve, likely through some kind of mechanical rule set that causes higher and higher taxes for posting items in congested area’s like jita, and amarr. this should work in a way that it causes people to expand out every system surrounded jita, and ultimately apply to the region itself, so that people will want to put out of region after some point of a regions market being saturated with goons. In this way, the prices of the economy fluctuate greatly, are more easily accessed from a ll over eve, and bring back the play style of trading to a viable state.

On another note we should really bring to the conversion the point of bots, and multi-boxing. These things are fought with good design and studying the way they are doing things then making changes to stop it.

for example, multiboxing miners is possible because you dont need to do something that requires your attention, you turn on lasers and afk and collect isk. This is not really playing the game, and its actually hurting the social aspects of it, on top of that the miners themselves are forced into pvp often when they dont want to do it, which results in a negative experience all around for everything when ti comes to mining.

its important to understand the immense technical problems that come from changing parts of the game that are so old, but its vital to the future of the game.

lastly,
Merin Ryskin is a troll. Ignore him. Seriously, he is damaged goods or something and will never agree on removing pvp aspects from the game. he’s hard mode got blinders on for pvp, and as the ceo of ccp will ultimately cause the downfall of his own game for it.

No. Stop posting stupid ideas.

and war eligibility changes need to be made to remove a corp from being war eligible if they drop a station, as stations make up the heart and soul of a corp in corporate identity, and coming together for a greater purpose.

Lolwut? We already have way too many stations and now you want to make it impossible to ever destroy a highsec station? How is it even an accomplishment at that point, when nobody can prevent you from doing it? There’s no “greater purpose” when you just built the 50th completely redundant station in a system, a task that was guaranteed to succeed as soon as you got enough ISK to pay for it. All you’d do with this proposal is remove all sense of accomplishment from building a station and turn it into a meaningless participation trophy that everyone gets to have.

missions for starters need to grant all members in the squad the value, instead of split it.

You mean I can put a bunch of alpha alts in my fleet and multiply the profits? Do you even put the slightest amount of effort into thinking through the consequences of your terrible ideas?

(The answer is obviously “no”.)

and help bolster the demand and reason for existence on mission corps.

Not really. Mission corps are a pointless concept in a game where missions can be effortlessly farmed by a single player. You’d have to completely overhaul the mission system, and why bother putting developer time into the worst part of EVE?

This is vital to the long term health of eve. additionally the base isk values should be raised significantly to a min of 1-2m for level 1 missions, and double each one subsequently after.

I see your understanding of economics is as lacking as your understanding of game design.

(Hint: look up this little thing called “inflation”.)

Ah, the delusional ramblings of the truly insane.

PS: if I’m the CEO then I’m way more successful than you will ever be, with that nice $30-40 million in cash sitting in my bank account. TBH, why would I even care if EVE dies when I’m already rich enough to live in luxury for the rest of my life without working a single day?

4 Likes

Because highsec isn’t boring enough?

2 Likes

EVE is a PvP Game…

You knew this when you downloaded it…
You know this when you created your character…
You knew this when you exited the station!

3 Likes

I doubt the asset destruction in highsec makes a real impact, but you are forgetting theres still PVE. CCP could adjust the difficulty of the sites a bit making it a more gradual approach towards more difficult content. (1.0 - 0.5)

What is the problem for a person to save up a nice ship. There would still be PVE risk. And honoustly if you fly a 10 bill ship your not going to farm in highsec. Furthermore I doubt sitting on a 10 bill ship influences the economy as much as bounties comming in.

I think what people are missing is that the newest players start basically in the most difficult to understand area by rules of the game. Besides that EVE is the only really good game if you like the space theme and mmo’s. I like PVP, got two characters with a trillion in kills but not everyone does. Especially not if your4 new to a game and you get insta blabbed by a experienced player.

This idea is to increase player retention not yuor gameplay. Plenty of options to go PVP if highsec was PVE only.

Theres not a single thread on the forum where you actually add something to the discusion. Good old forum troll.

1 Like

So, you want to penalize players for not wanting to actually fight other players? That’s idiotic.

It’s not so much the asset destruction, but rather the hyper-farming you would enable with such a safe space. Not by the newbros you are invoking as the reason for your idea, but by the veterans who will scale up their bling boats and flood the already over-supplied economy with the efforts of their 100% safe farming.

But more generally to your idea, all the evidence says that new players aren’t staying with the game because it is too exciting and full of explosions - they are leaving because they are bored or confused. Making your game more boring isn’t likely to help this situation, just make it worse.

So, -1 it is to this idea.

6 Likes

Your worried the new players wont know what they should and should not shoot, theres this little green button that stops most of this for new players.

1 Like

I suggest you take a look at the monthly economic report. 8 of the top 10 regions for destruction are in empire space.

While PVE rewards are minor, highsec industry in huge - take a look at the production and trade numbers in the MER.

For a player driven economy to work there must be risk commensurate with reward. There are things you can do to manage the risk but this is a skill you develop through experience, it should not be hard coded by the developers.

3 Likes



4 Likes