When you mine out an anom or encounter diamond rats or an incursion in system or Triglavians dont you have to change your gameplay?
But we are making progress, you are now seeing that there is an alternative to waiting out of game, and that was the point I was making.
Yes and the complaining about how they couldnt take advantage of structures because of it was very loud until some bright spark worked out to EVADE it (see) they just had to have a holding corp.
You see, there are people who only can stand to change their gameplay when its going to definiately profit them, but cant apply this same logic to wardecs? Dont you see a disconnect there?
I believe some of players just wait out diamond rats like they wait out unwanted pvp. I also believe what enforced gameplay is bad for EvE. You are right, options is there, but problem is, majority of high-sec bears not interested enough to take them, so they stop playing and stop paying. This is why we have current wardec rules
Iām not high-sec bear, most of my active game time I spend outside of high-sec, but I do it willingly.
As for bears crying about structures - itās their problem, current ruleset protect them from wardecs with some restrictions imposed, this is fair. Holding corp - fair game in my books, since it can be attacked, structure can be destroyed and core taken.
I just dunno why you would want to be sympathetic to people who say āThis is impossible!ā And quit and not people who say āThereās gotta be a way around this!ā
I mean, the second lot are bound to be better industrials if they can use their initiative in the face of a challenge, right?
But apart from the above two types of player, and one of them having a bad time and one enjoying it, is there any other reason its bad?
Ok heres a question; would it affect ypur position at all if the only other people in EvE you could interact with directly were allied Corp mates?
I think our discussion hinges on because if it were, if Safe Mode was an option, from a players point of view it basically would be less people playing.
I wouldnt play if there was no danger to my peaceful activities, at all.
This would be absolutely different game. But we are nowhere near such situation. There is thousands of players willingly exposing themselves to PvP by playing in null and low security systems or anchoring structures.
But we arent talking about Null or Low, we are talking about high sec.
Thats the fear those of us that revel in the fact anything can happen in EvE have; that outside of fealty to a Lord in Null and the wasteland of Low there would be no dynamism, no living universe, just cloistered isk farms doing nothing but earning, and following the money, to the betterment eventually and only to the Lords of Null vOv
There is only answer to this, null and low sec must be more attractive, while high-sec must be low income zone for new and risk averse players. Currently this paradigm broken by level 4 mission blitzing and ruined 0.0 anomaly farming, I guess CCP will do something about it, probably they will nerf hell out of high-sec missions.
CCP donāt really affraid of changing status quo, at least they donāt hesitated to nerf null-sec anomaly farming a lot. Missions nerf would be logical extension of previous actoins.
If null life will be more profitable - it will definitely attract more players. Iām playing long enough to remember old days null secs, they was almost empty, battle of hundreds was considered huge and rare. Now CCP have issues with 6000 players in one system not enough to provide environment for great battle.
Make highsec less attractive, null and low more attractive, and most players will willingly go after big isk, even if it mean more risky gameplay. Some players will never take risks, they need to be left alone in low income high security area, so they can peacefully farm, have their fun and pay subscribtions to CCP.
I fear that the target audience you are talking about would rather make 10m a day in HS safely under your ideas than 100m a day in Null where there is the chance they might be asked to do something that interrupts their playstyle by their Lord.
It also wouldnt affect those of us for whom isk/hr isnt the main motivating play factor. How that profit is attained is more important to us than the isk reward at the end.
Except not the people who would log off for a week rather than risk anything during a HS war, surely?
And these are the people we are talking about. And given that you feel there would be more of them under this new situation, wont that lead eventually to Null not even having basic production as there is no need as it can all be done in utter safety in High instead?
I cant honestly say I care about CCPs interest.
Id have thought having a good game was, but if they wanna be greedy about it, they can take the money from people who dont like fun I guess.
Its just sad that a niche would be closed once again because money.
Its why pop music is balls.
Hey you kids, get off my lawn.
EDIT: Personally, I dont see people who just want to sit and accumulate score points doing nothing hanging around for a decade, but I guess if 1000 people play for a year and one person plays for 1000 years, CCP will take the former vOv Its āgood businessā
People need to stop making this argument. Itās not your problem what CCPās finances are. Your goal as a player should be to gave a good game to play. Whether CCPās making a profit is none of your concern.
Then they shouldnāt. EVE was fine before those people started playing, and it will be fine if they quit.
Itās not worth it. It was a good change, but not nearly enough to change player behavior. What does it mean? That players have to use NPC industry slots instead of their own? Thatās barely a difference in efficiency.
These people are going to quit playing if you make high-sec less profitable for the same reason that they would quit if you make high-sec more dangerous. This is the part that you donāt seem to get; itās a zero-sum game to them.
Why people need to stop making this argument, because you donāt like it? How about ānoā
Iām not sure you right about āthis players not neededā. Most importantly, CCP not sure you are right about it.
Difference in efficiency make difference in profits, right? So carebears penalized for not taking risks.
If they stop playing the game if CCP make high-sec less profitable - they can leave, I will not cry a bit. But if they want to mine 5 mil/hour in highsec belt while paying for game time - im fine with it. Or if they want to peacefully make letās say 30 mil/hour from missions - Iām fine with it. It is question of right balance between risk and income.
Because itās a red herring. You arenāt CCPās finance department, and donāt know how changes would affect their bottom line, so this is just conjecture on your part. As a player, worry about what would make the game better or worse, and not what would make the company developing it more or less profitable.