Should High-Sec Actually Be Safe? ☠️

Communications Center General Discussion
1

Should High-Sec Actually Be Safe?

For years the standard response to high-sec ganking discussions has been:

“High-sec is safer, not safe.”

I understand the philosophy behind that. The sandbox needs risk.
But looking at the current state of the game, I think it is worth asking whether unrestricted high-sec ganking still serves the health of the game.

  1. It primarily affects new and casual players

High-sec is where:

• new players learn the game
• casual players operate
• most economic activity begins

When a new player loses their first ship to a coordinated gank, the lesson they often take away is not “adapt.” The lesson is that the game is hostile to them.
Player retention matters more than philosophical purity.

  1. The economic justification appears weak

A common argument is that ganking drives the economy through destruction.

But the Monthly Economic Report from CCP Games consistently shows that the majority of destruction value occurs in null-sec wars and large fleet battles.

Those events destroy vastly more value than high-sec ganks.

So if the goal is economic stimulation, high-sec ganking likely contributes very little at the macro level.

  1. The benefits are concentrated in a small group

High-sec ganking is practiced by a relatively small portion of the player base.

The rewards primarily go to those players, while the negative experience is distributed across:

• new players
• casual haulers
• miners
• mission runners

From a design perspective that is a cost borne by many players for the benefit of very few.

  1. There is very little interactive counterplay

Most high-sec ganks follow a simple pattern:

  1. Target is scanned
  2. Effective HP is calculated
  3. Exact number of ships required is assembled
  4. Alpha strike occurs
  5. CONCORD arrives afterward

The engagement is usually decided before the target even realizes what is happening.
That creates a very limited gameplay interaction.

  1. A future high-sec could still allow crime without allowing ganking

Imagine a system where persistent criminals are effectively excluded from high-security space.

In a realistic future society, authorities would track repeat offenders and deny them access to heavily policed systems.

That does not eliminate PvP from the game. It simply separates environments:

• High-sec for secure economic activity
• Low-sec and null-sec for open conflict

Those areas already exist for players who want unrestricted PvP.

Conclusion

EVE’s sandbox does not depend on every region having identical risk.

A high-security region that is actually secure could:

• improve new player retention
• encourage economic activity
• reduce frustration for casual players

The rest of New Eden would still provide more than enough space for piracy, warfare, and conflict.

The question worth asking is simple:

Does high-sec ganking still serve the long-term health of the game, or has it become a legacy mechanic that harms player retention more than it helps the sandbox?

1 Like
2

Hi sec is too safe as it is. People can keep making these arguments but it’s a PVP game so players need to deal with it. If new players choose to leave then it’s the wrong game for them. End of story

4 Likes
3

the absolute beauty of this game is that is mirrors real life. Are you safe irl? No, but you feel like you are, right? Murder and violent crime statistics should be all the proof you need that you’re not safe, yet you still conduct your life every day without issue, yes?

This is the wild wild west, without will smith. New players, old players, casual or dedicated, everyone gets a crack as building an empire, and everyone is capable of toggling the neuter button off and going on a rampage through the neighborhood.

1 Like
5

They are making a whole new region for new players already…so no, Hi Sec should not be made safer. I think it should be made more dangerous.

3 Likes
6

So you want EvE online to be like EvE Echos???

Where plex is cheaper to pay for with RL cash than to buy in game???
Where rat loot is worthless?
where minerals are basically worthless??
where from what i hear, industry is basically dead…cause no one needs to buy a ship…so the market is dead…

Is that what you want???
Cause that is what you will get with your bullcrap…
you should really just shut up and sit down and think…
cause you are advocating for the desctruction of EvE and shutdown of the servers.

3 Likes
7

EVE’s numbers reflect a niche audience for a difficult and unforgiving game.

WOW’s numbers reflect a safe and simple game for the masses.

If EVE were as popular as WOW it wouldn’t be the same game. No thank you

4 Likes
8

Oh don’t give us that bullcrap.

It is a current state in which there is zero evidence that you have ever undocked….let alone ever actually played the game you pretend to care about so much. You are like some armchair general….sitting 30 miles behind the front, pretending to care oh so much about the poor rookie troops who ARE actually playing the game.

Away with your nonsense !

2 Likes
9

It never did.

Yes.

But it shouldn’t be eliminated - it should be balanced.

10

Only someone with a low IQ would want that!

1 Like
11

The same IQ have those who see any traces of logic in that statement. A classic strawman argument.

12

The true irony is that way more noob ships are lost to NPCs than to ganking. But you never see these whiny forum trolls call for an end to belt rats, etc. That just shows off the fact that the real issue is that these useless trolls cannot bear the fact that anyone is ( unlike them ) ever actually undocking and having PvP fun….because they are useless at it themselves.

But rather than admit they are useless, we get this ‘ think of the poor children !’ BS in which they pretend to care so much about noobs.

1 Like
13

Not noobs. Players who have been playing long enough to lose something valuable, but not long enough to stay in the game after they lose it to a perceived unfair mechanic.

14

Refuse to read Ai slop especially since your spamming the forums

2 Likes
15

CONCORD is unfair.

CCP should remove it and make the game FAIR for everybody!!!

3 Likes
16

what do you mean stay in the game???

17

As subscribers.

18

Artificial intelligence tools can be useful in many contexts, but on community forums they often produce the opposite of what a healthy discussion space requires. On the EVE Online forums in particular, allowing unrestricted AI-generated posts risks degrading the quality of conversation because such posts tend to be repetitive, impersonal, and easily weaponized by bad actors.

First, AI posts are inherently redundant. Large language models generate text by recombining existing information, which means many AI responses repeat the same general explanations that already exist in guides, wikis, or earlier forum threads. Instead of adding new experience or insight from players, AI replies often restate common knowledge in longer form. This creates noise that pushes genuine player contributions further down the page and makes threads harder to follow.

Second, AI posts can be spam-like in volume and style. Because they can be produced instantly and in large quantities, a single user can flood discussions with lengthy responses that appear detailed but contribute little new substance. Forums function best when posts reflect the time, judgment, and perspective of real participants. When automated text begins to dominate threads, the signal-to-noise ratio drops and meaningful conversation becomes more difficult.

Third, AI content is easily used by trolls or disruptive posters. Someone who wants to derail a discussion can generate large blocks of text designed to appear authoritative while actually being misleading, vague, or irrelevant. Since AI writing often sounds confident regardless of accuracy, it can spread confusion or provoke arguments without the poster having invested real effort or accountability.

Finally, AI-generated posts tend to produce lower-quality discussion overall. EVE Online’s forums are valuable because players share direct experience: battle reports, economic strategies, alliance politics, and personal stories from the game. Those perspectives come from actual gameplay and community involvement. AI text cannot replicate that lived experience, and when it replaces genuine voices it weakens the purpose of the forum itself.

For these reasons, restricting AI-generated posts would help preserve the quality of discourse. Forums work best when they amplify authentic player knowledge rather than automated summaries. By discouraging AI-produced content, the EVE community can maintain discussions that are clearer, more original, and grounded in the real experiences of its pilots.

3 Likes
19

but what do you mean stay in the game???
its a sandbox, not a theme park on rails.

what does stay in the game mean?

20

I literally couldn’t be more clear.

21

If nobody understands you, then you aren’t actually clear.

:woman_teacher:t2:

2 Likes