[SERIOUS] How would you re-design Highsec if you could?

(Yiole Gionglao) #101

CCP has been running an experiment since Rubicon: they put their development money where satisfaction was rather than where money was.

Along this interesting road, EVE has lost 30% PCU, has implemented F2P, CCP has shrinked by 100 employees and they’ve lost 10% of their annual revenue -all losses AFTER the F2P boost.

Dunno what others think, but in retrospect, looks to me as if CCP should had invested its very limited resources on moneygivers rather than fans.

(Nevyn Auscent) #102

Except you neglect the utterly changing market also. We have no idea if they would have lost 50% by going your proposed route.

(Yiole Gionglao) #103

Oh yes, the market. EVE Online, the game that never was in the mainstream MMO market, suddenly falls victim to the devolution of the mainstream MMO market…

See, unless CCP states otherwise, there is a problem EVE has never had: getting new players willing to test it. Even today, the numbers of new characters created are well above the historical average.

(Nevyn Auscent) #104

Yet the overall player curve follows the market curve fairly well as a descriptor. It might be “niche” but it’s still an MMO.

(gnshadowninja) #105

This, just look at the recent post by that guy who complained about war dec system and all his new members leaving due to dying to war decs.

You don’t have to look far into his post to work out he caused the war decs, he motivated the deccers to hunt his alliance by talking ■■■■ and then left his recruits to the mercy of the deccers just to post a video/thread crying about it.

There seems to be a common thought that we sit there hunting new players which just isn’t the case, at what point does someone become a regular player?
If you join [insert big alliance] as a new player then they should prepare you for the wars that come with it, increasing war prices, adding structures and all these other fancy ideas won’t take away stupidity of players.

Actually we mass dec to get content, based on your reply it seems we got some from you.
We have on average 20-30 players that need stuff to shoot at when they log on, this need used to be met by hunting parties with lower amount of decs but with increasing nerfs in the game that have knock on effects to war deccers we had no choice to adapt.

This is the case unless I’ve been doing something wrong the last 8 year’s.

This is strange considering I personally have been involved in two fleet fights recently, regarding the trade hub and pipes look at my comment above about adapting. Anyone who knows me knows I love hunting in high sec but I refuse to do it under this shitty system (crap locates, no watch list, corp dropping etc…)

(Savoycabbage) #106

Oh dear…please please please bring your two wardecced characters to a system I’m in. Oh, and please also do tell me how many players you think will regularly risk a 2.5b ship on a fight that they aren’t sure they can win.

Because that’s where their targets are. If our targets are spending time in large numbers away from these areas, we’ll follow them. The truth is that the majority of hisec activity is in trade hubs/pipes, mission hubs and incursion zones. Outside of these areas activity is very very low. If you want to catch your targets, the best place to be is around the trade hubs.

Some players like to hunt, and that’s fine. The issue is that the workload vs. rewards is pretty terrible currently. The effort that has to be put in to hunt down a single target is incredibly high . Other players who can’t put in the hours necessary to hunt, get their content from prowling the trade lanes and hubs.

I think that something needs to be highlighted from what @gnshadowninja has said as well. The mass dec is to provide content for 20-30 players. Please let that sink in next time you complain that wardec corps are targeting 1000+ member alliances.

(Dyver Phycad) #107

I am not complaining about that. I complain that it’s prohibitively expensive to do that at all, especially with alliances beyond the 5k character count. In case this “before you complain” was directed at me, I have never complained about wars in this thread or other threads at all. :slight_smile:

(Savoycabbage) #108

To be fair, that was a general observation. Seeing moderate to large alliances complaining about wardecs just makes me laugh.

(Whitehound) #109

In null-sec can one tell easier who is and isn’t on your side and knows which systems are more or less safe. In high-sec do they get war-decced by a bunch of players, who will bring in alts from NPC corps. Suddenly all of high-sec could be the enemy in theory.

I still think CCP should simply make the location of war targets visible on the map when a war is declared mutual. Let both sides see where everyone is. Then large alliances have little to complain about when they can see where those 20-30 war-deccing players are. If they then still don’t use their superior numbers to go after them then I’d say it’s their own fault.

(Savoycabbage) #110

I think part of the problem is, and this may be an assumption, that nullsec players don’t have a hisec tab on their overview. I’ll let people think for themselves how this would work…not my job to help the prey after all…

I think the mistake that many nullsec players make is thinking that hisec is safe for them and they can relax their guard. You wouldn’t find many competent players taking a battleship through gates in null or lowsec without a scout to make sure there isn’t a fleet on the otherside - or at least trying to get some intel. Why should hisec be any different for them?

Most of the issue is that people treat hisec different from low and null sec.

(Anderson Geten) #111


Remove the ability to engage people freely in their mission/trade hubs. That screams of seal clubbing.
Limit it to the surroundings of structures owned by one of the corporations at war. Meaning war deccing is a way to destroy structures, and defend/aggress on those structures, instead of a way to reap free kills on noobies.


I would enforce a rule that if you want to kill a naked ship (in HS), then you need to field at least as much isk in the attacking ship that you will lose.
In effect, all ship would have more hull-to-mineral. T2 ships would use the base value of the T1.


When someone is ganked in HS, he automatically adds a wanted (no the present bounties) on the ganker, to the price of the ship destroyed. eg if my ship costs 50M, the ganker gets a 50M wanted.
Whenever a player with wanted value is killed, up to 20% of his ship cost is taken from his wanted pool, with 3/4 of it going to the person who have been ganked and still have wanted, and 1/4 (so up to 5% of the ship cost) going to the killer (can be concord)
eg if he loses a 10M ship to concord, and had a 50M wanted, 2M are taken from it, 1M5 are split among people with wanted on him, 0.5M is given to concord.
… and remove the present bounty system.

(Omnathious Deninard) #112

And effectively kill off the game, congratulations.

(Remiel Pollard) #113


(Anderson Geten) #114

serious thread.

so yes, that’s what I would do. Guess what ? I can’t and I don’t even want to. This is more of an imaginary topic, “what if” means people are dreaming.

(Remiel Pollard) #115

This isn’t reddit.

(Anderson Geten) #116

Then what are you doing here ? OP asked for an opinion on a specific topic, not yours on mine.

(Remiel Pollard) #117

I was honestly just lurking, then I saw a really stupid idea and had to express my thoughts on it.

Personally, I’d either remove high sec entirely, or do all space security (aside from sov nul) the way Elite does it - everyone is fair game everywhere, with consequences for illegal engagements varying from limited access to station services, to massive bounties making you an attractive target to everyone, and since everyone is free to engage everywhere all the time, with no CONCORD, this would also make the bounty system viable.

(Whitehound) #118

The two big problems they have is their access to tradehubs being blocked, and new players, who still sit in high-sec and getting farmed for being noobs.

When an alliance lets every corporation recruit new players on their own, disorganized and with very little support, then they become prey to the strategies of the war-deccers.

Both problems are however manageable and it can be done in one solution. Have a training corp in high-sec, where new players can learn to fight back while at the same time they can also help with securing the access to the tradehubs for the entire alliance.

(Anderson Geten) #119

No, you did not.

Only little babies consider that when they want to eat, then they need to eat. And go screaming to be sure everybody knows about it.

Don’t be a jerk, keep your thought for people interested in them.

(Remiel Pollard) #120

Yes, I did. Don’t tell me how and when I get to express my opinion. How ■■■■■■■ dare you. Get a clue, you aren’t the thought police.