@Brisc_Rubal lol can somebody tell this to CCP. They’ve gotta do better with HS PvP. It’s a lot bigger deal than they think and they’re headed the complete opposite direction they should be.
Edit: or maybe like give us a CSM rep? I donno it’s just so hard to relay any information to CCP with HS PvP cause everything gets buried in salt on the forums and reddit downvotes the subject to oblivion.
We need some way to get player feedback to CCP about HS PvP mechanic changes. (From someone other than crying PvEers)
They’re seeing Albions safe zones and thinking they should do the same without realizing Albion SafeZones make VERY low income compared to their “null sec” zones (like magnitudes less in comparison to eve’s very profitable HS). They’ll have to gut HS income or the game will just break.
CCP need to have it spelled out to them that there’s a crucial interplay between highsec being safe and highsec being boring. Highsec is where most noobs first encounter risk…and such exposure is generally good for them. The notion, expressed by some, that people who are risk averse in highsec are all going to flock to a riskier lowsec if highsec is safer is just palpable nonsense.
CCP also need to grasp that highsec ganking cannot rationally be defined solely as a profit or no profit activity. There are numerous reasons for ganking other than purely financial. For example ganking is perhaps the only way to deal with a persistent bumper, a citadel loot thief, or just generally pesky people who are invulnerable to any other deterrent. Highsec ganking can also be about exerting perceived power over an area.
CCP say they want to protect noobs, and yet this above perspective comes from someone ( myself ) who was a noob only a year ago. The irony.
But I don’t think anyone has actually gone to CCP and made the point that a considerable number of the very noobs they claim to want to be retaining disagree with their changes and instead of feeling ‘protected’ actually feel CCP are making the game more boring…which ironically is just as likely a source of people departing.
If nobody has said that, it’s largely because they don’t have the data to back up the claim. I appreciate your anecdote, and I’m happy to pass it on, but they were hearing the exact opposite from a dozen people a day before.
I’m curious, has the idea of forced green safety for omega accounts in highsec been bounced around at all? Or is the idea to keep the illusion of a pvp sandbox and just remove all the sand in highsec ‘one more nerf’ at a time?
I’m sure you have fought hard and thank you for that, maybe the problem is constant whining and who ccp listen to.
CCP seem to take the easy option to fix many problems like war decs and ganking which ends up destroying play styles, these people then leave and the snowflake and whiner are left.
I’ve tried in the past to voice my opinion on ganking and I support it as a play style, to which the whinners than try to discredit actions and call me a ganker alt.
Maybe ccp should ask the right people or try and actually play the game them selves in that area of concern…
I try and look from both side of the coin, often each side is so entrenched in their own play styles they can’t see it from the other point of view. Often being sucked into irrational arguments to defend it. You like many other null groups are guilty of this as are gankers and their victims and war dec groups, as are many Agers.
It’s often asking the right question that will create a fix not listening to endless arguments which go in circles.