so @Aiko_Danuja is correct
1 Like
Correct. We came back to the survivorship bias. Now the only question you have to answer is - who it should accommodate in order to keep the number of subscribers and the amount of content they produce healthy?
Well, CCP has obviously chosen this approach.
If you don’t like it, I mean… ok? Thanks for sharing!
Yes. So far.
Welcome to reality.
In case you didn’t get it. “Yes. So far.“ means: Yes, the approach has been like that so far, but it doesn’t mean it will stay like that in the future.
Enjoy your fantasy!
Thanks.
And the current future, CCP is making a whole new region for new players…which means they will amp up the risks of High sec, not lower them.
I don’t know how you made that conclusion, but ok… If you say so.
The recent economic report makes it pretty clear that PvE players can expect an incoming nerf. The creation of an additional safe space for new players is further evidence to support that theory. It’s not hard to understand.
I don’t see that from the numbers.
The economy is stabilizing after a long period of scarcity, so the commodities are cheaper, players can afford to lose and thus the destruction is increased. The only players that see this as bad are big industrialists seeing their profit margins collapse.
PvE is not a major factor here.
Well, I’m not sure your assessment carries much weight with anyone.
I’m not either. I might or might not change it after TheOz Report.
No. People like you that use ChatGPT to make constant victim posts need to have their ships destroyed in High Sec. It just needs to happen.
7 Likes
indeed, I scored a grand 83 on my IQ test several decades ago, but you know what? I’m smart enough to not be a silly mcsillyface about video games. So what does that say about you?
1 Like
I have omega on other accounts, but currently I am an alpha miner. I answer this honestly, Hell No!
This is part of the appeal of EVE being different as a MMO. Day one you have a bullseye on you. Not that you will notice it much in HS, since most of us don’t fly ships we can’t afford to lose. No one in their right mind is going to pop a venture full of anything in HS ( unless they are masochistic ) because you are not worth the cost of their ship.
I did hear of a venture popped in high once, last year, some dude had a ‘Aoede’ Mining Laser Upgrade on it. What were they thinking?! I heard the module dropped and they walked away with 1 billion ISK. Such is life.
As a rule of thumb, a Drake is a cheap battle cruiser at 55 to 60 million ISK. Your ship has to be worth twice as much. So some idiot hauling a load of 250 million in a Miasmos is worth a shot. If the ship is a mining barge with all sorts of bling mods, the Drake is going to take it down.
As a personal note, I don’t gank unarmed ships, there is no sport in it. I want the other ship to put up a fight. This game would bore me running around popping tin cans all day. Tin cans don’t shoot back.
Fly Safe o7
3 Likes
Nobody ganks in a drake. Two catalysts are going to do more damage at a tenth the cost.
Thats the problem with a lot of T1 hauler.
Goes without saying, you need either a bud in the other ship or 2 omega accounts for that scenario. There is nothing wrong with using the drake as an example. I could have cited a tornado or some other battle cruiser just as easy. My point is making your ship cost more than 100 million ISK and/or hauling it around in HS might attract attention you don’t want.
The OP is asking about something that might already be on it’s way, with the new region they plan to tell us more about later. Making people safe should not be part of the game, there is suppose to be risk in everything we do here. If they do make that region a “safe place” then expect a lot of alt armies in there generating ISK by the Bustard loads.
Fly Safe o7
1 Like