High-sec gets removed then get ready to remove the rest of the game. Remove the backbone from a game and the rest shall fall. @OP
1 Like
I generally believe that low is more dangerous than Null.
Yeah, I agree. If you are in a large nullsec cartel, your area is actually pretty safe. If it wasn’t, people wouldn’t live there. The point of null is actually a protected (i.e. safe) LUCRATIVE area of space to live in. But you need the organization and wherewithal to protect it. Nullsec’cers have that, newbs and what not don’t.
2 Likes
go play Tibia on a pvp server, We have had GMs intervene and summon hoards of demons because the oldest guilds on the servers will camp the spawn point in the main cities and kill you as you come in, or they will camp the depot and town entrances.
eve would become a thing of if your not in 1 of the few largest alliances in the game your dead the second you undock. RIP starters. lets finish killing eve.
2 Likes
I have been both amused and amazed at the numbers of folks who enjoy doing something like sitting there camping a station blowing up whatever pixels happen to come out of it. I’m not saying it is illegitimate, I’m not saying it shouldn’t be allowed, I’m just saying I’m both amused and amazed at the number of people who find amusement in something I personally find little point in. One day I undocked in a noob shuttle and got blown away by a station camper sitting right there on top of the station. Since I woke back up in the same station, I merely undocked again only to be blown up again. I wondered how long this guy would sit there doing this, how long would it amuse him. So I literally undocked 100 times in a free noob shuttle just to see what would happen. Sure enough he sat there hitting F1 or whatever and just blew up my shuttle 100 straight times. I finally got carpel tunnel from the exercise, chuckled to myself, and retired for the night. Again, perfectly legit, and I was perfectly fine with it. But I could also see many people not being fine with it.
3 Likes
yeah that’s why I made the reference about the game I played in high school, you would have high level characters (there is no lvl cap) sit outside in groups and kill new players that come to the main towns at lvl 8. At death you have a 10% loss of skills, experience, and every item has a 10% chance to drop, with a 100% drop of your backpack (cargo). GMs had enough and intervened for the day. happened on various servers because they were causing the players to leave and those pvp servers are rather dead.
but hey that would never happen in eve right?
2 Likes
and high is the most dangerous
1 Like
You would need a different risk-reward formula. Today security status sets both. What other option would you offer for a player who wants a period of low risk/reward, either because they’re new, has been on a long break or is recovering from a big loss?
Every once in a while someone comes up with a really wrong idea, Dopefish.
This is one of those times.
1 Like
Report @Teckos_Pech post as “Inappropriate” for forum rule violation on point 7:
“7. Abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers is prohibited.”
“CCP operate a zero-tolerance policy on abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers.”
“Players who attack or abuse employees of CCP, or ISD volunteers, will be permanently banned from the EVE Online forums across all their accounts with no recourse, and may also be subject to action against their game accounts.”
https://community.eveonline.com/support/policies/forum-moderation-policy-en/
You have no business abusing ISDs.
You are WAY out of line.
Buldath has been bending over backwards to allow more freedom on the boards, as has been CCPs new policy, but that does NOT include levity for you attacking/abusing ISDs.
3 Likes
You are 100% correct.
I do not “Police” The Forums. That is not my responsibility as an ISD.
No action has been taken on this thread.
The truth is actually close to what OP stated.
But there’s not a policies of specific area which should be removed (the CONCORD in OP). It’s the current principle of resources distribution which should go.
The model of higher resources for lower security actually shows it’s invalidity.
Players shouldn’t choice between risk and reward (which are unproportional on a huge manner by the way). But they should decide of how deep they can be involved in game proccess.
Those who are ready to spend the whole life in virtual reallity (inside EVE Online) would home null-secs and will be keepeing care about their stuff there. Others can choose different styles to play (not to live in) this game.
So high-secs should be filled with all types of resources, restrictions should be down and more security should be given to high-secs.
Resource distribution should be even (more or less).
I’m not opposed to removing highsec as it current is (perhaps keep a couple of small ‘learning systems’ noobs are thrown into as new characters). However, if highsec is removed, then there should be a few NPC nullsec corps created which anyone can join. This is because, as I’ve already stated, it isn’t easy for everybody out there to join up with existing nullsec cartels. Perhaps some of you have played the game for 15 years and have friends and contacts in every nullsec cartel throughout New Eden. Perhaps some of you can just snap your fingers and yawn while jumping membership from this nullsec cartel to that one to another one. Perhaps some of you have the tolerance for the colonoscopy these cartels give you as a condition for joining up. Others don’t, so they’ll need a place to go to.
To be honest, I think the whole concept of removing Hi Sec is DOA and purely academic since CCP will never do it.
If anything, they will add additional types of space, and maybe adjust the security gradient between 1.0 and 0.5 space.
1 Like
One of the easiest things CCP could do to encourage the exploration by new EVE players outside of HS is to remove the chance of a gatecamp only on those gates leading into/out of HS. Increase only on those gates the gate gun capabilities and add additional NPC forces where warranted. All the other conditions of LS/NS remain.
The scenario currently usually runs as a new pilot something along this line: Decides to be brave and try LS/NS. Arrives at said gate and receives a pop up warning about the space he is about to enter. Mulls it over and decides he’s going to try it. Jumps in and gets scrammed/webbed by the gate camp that knows that a lot of new pilots try this particular gate quite often. Dies quickly, but usually not without some taunts thrown his way. Loses his ship, perhaps his pod,too. Best players resolves to retry it sometime soon. The majority mull over that they were warned about LS/HS in the forums/net. The gate they took to the location warned them it was going to be dangerous and when they jumped through, the warning was reinforced by a swift gank and loss. Instead of the game rewarding a player for trying a new thing outside his comfort zone, it punishes the behavior it would like to see immediately after the player does it.
…and CCP can’t figure out why they cannot get the people out of HS.
2 Likes
that’s not a bad idea, but wont work considering some groups like to place supers with smartbombs on those gates
I’m just about maximal carebear. Yet lately I’ve been living down in nullsec, enjoying the challenges.
Different people play at different paces, and if I had been forced to “Graduate” from highsec before I was ready, I probably would have quit, and CCP would have been out multiple subs.
Don’t get rid of highsec… give more reason to graduate.
4 Likes
fake news
Hey… it’s what they claimed 
I have no idea either way.
Totally true story though.
While the similar situation has played out many times, each player approaches it differently.
Your story sums up my new char very well, right up until the ship and pod are destroyed. Instead of running the to forums to complain, or quitting outright, I struck up a convo with my attackers, asked for advice, and got recruited. Then the game actually got fun.
1 Like