and you know what happens in the 4th quarter? =)
You’re right. 100% certainty of losing your ship to CONCORD is certainty, not risk. Do you agree with my proposal to add risk to ganking by giving a 25% chance that CONCORD does not respond and the ganker keeps their ship?
but involves the greatest rewards
Only because idiots voluntarily give out easy ISK. Player stupidity is not a balance issue.
Neither do you so your speculation is just empty words, ain’t it? Also there’s what, 8 final liminality systems? How many fortresses and minor victories?
Have you even noticed that the flow of liminality-eligible invasions has been reduced to essentially nothing? Three max recon systems and almost none blue or yellow. Hardly seems like a mass conversion of high sec.
Did you even think that comment through?
Not CCP’s problem. That’s player choice, and should not be dictated by terrible game mechanics. If you want more targets in low sec, then low sec needs to be worth the effort. For most players it isn’t. Lowsec has nothing to offer. Maybe you should advocate for lowsec to be improved so people want to be there?
If you nerf loot drops for PvP in high sec, that hardly incentivises anyone to move their expensive ships to lowsec, does it? So your own suggestion isn’t even fit for purpose.
i only know of the problems with stagnation in nullsec why blackout came so im atleast hoping they are sorting balancing issues between high/low/null and i guess they started with mineral rebalancing so you wont get all types in eiter place. So there is more trade between all sec ratings. in that i also hope they adress rewards between the diffrent “difficulty zones” as they are not balanced atm.
rorqual yealds is a problem, supercapital farming is a problem, and highsec ganking being more profitable and target rich than lowsec but without a risk to do and easy to do with alpha chars is a problem atleast according to me
highsec needing resources from nullsec and nullsec needing resources from highsec is atleast a good start to adress the problems but i dont think its enogh
neiter highsec or nullsec should be self sufficient from each other. most null alliances disagree and most miners/industrials would disagree but we need more trade between places that is why i suggested splitting tradehubs up also.
Player stupidity is not a balance issue.
without a risk to do
100% certainty of loss to CONCORD is even harsher than a chance of loss in lowsec.
easy to do with alpha chars
Player stupidity is not a balance issue.
losing a catalyst is not a risk. its almost always a profit 
Correct. It is worse than a risk of loss, it is 100% certainty of loss.
its almost always a profit
Only against stupid players, and player stupidity is not a balance issue.
If we want to talk about risk/reward, maybe High-Sec carebears should stop risking stupidly expensive things for the low rewards that you can get in High-Sec. The only things worth putting expensive modules onto in High-Sec are Incursion battleships.
basically pvp should be worth less in highsec than lowsec. also highsec and null should need eachoter more so that low becomes the crossingpoint for the lifeblood for both systems. atleast my view on it
that would also put incentives for nullblocks to protect their trade from null to high and so on basically would bring new dimensions to eve.
It would be if highsec players would stop being stupid, and player stupidity is not a balance issue.
not if lowsec is forced as a chokepoint between high and lowsec and both needs the materials from eachother would also end stagnation in null and bring a new dimension to nullsec space. the stupid players comment is just immature new players start in highsec and none learns eve in a day 
or a week for that matter.
New players do not have the wealth to be profitably suicide ganked. Profitable suicide ganking comes from established veterans with more ISK than sense.
Or just pay attention while mining.
or new players that has sold plex to be looted by a small gang that wants to profit for no risk anyhow all pvp would be alot better if neiter highsec or nullsec was selfsufficient and that lowsec acutally worked as intended.
Stupidity is not a balance issue.
obviously it is when amassed in one location and not spread evenly.
How exactly do you plan to change this? Remember that you are dealing with idiots who are incapable of grasping basic game mechanics, so all of your ideas about “encouraging trade routes” or whatever will fail to accomplish anything.
would change how nullsec works and bring new dimensions to pvp. split up trade hubs and spread them out so you cant get everything in one place etc. placing all new players and expecting them to know everything and calling them stupid if they sell plex is a bad way to keep the game alive and healty and will only benefit a small group of players taking advantage of that.
How exactly do you intend to do that when trade hubs were created by players deciding not to split up?
calling them stupid if they sell plex
Sorry, but if you’re a newbie and go straight to RMTing ISK you don’t know how to use properly then you are an idiot. If the idiots don’t like being labeled honestly then they can GTFO and go back to WoW.
a small group of players taking advantage of that
And, again, if ganking is so profitable why don’t you do it too? Why are you sitting idle and not taking your share of the profit?
1 Like