You know that’s not true my little pumpkin 
1 Like
Please continue to do so. If you don’t like my response, it’s probably because of a mismatch between your intentions and my interpretation of:
You already know this, but I’ll say it for the benefit of the crowd: At this point in time there’s very few people left in the game that can honestly understand this appeal in the current universe implementation. Most paying players who could’ve enlightened us with an earnest answer for a past implementation are long gone.
So that naturally raises the next question: what are you going to do about it? “Not understanding” is a fine personal opinion, but the whole “I hear you, but” that came before really did learn hard into “I hear you but nothings gonna happen” tone. Maybe that’s my misinterpretation, but that deserved the response I gave: we don’t need to understand other playstyles to fight for lifting restrictions to make a more dangerous universe. Other players will naturally have fun using them.
CCP spawns new players in Highsec, so I started here. This is home. I’m sure there’s great content in nullsec, but I’ve never really seen it. I’ve been there, and I mostly saw empty systems with tidi. If I’d been recruited by a nullsec alliance, that’s where I would be, but I was recruited by a Highsec alliance and that’s why I’m here.
5 Likes
Can I have your stuff?
2 Likes
I lost all my stuff to gankers. 
The Vampire Princess an F1 monkey? What a waste of ganking talent that would be.
Let the tears flow little one.
What’s the benefit to any of this? The benefit is that the people who like doing it are able to engage in something they enjoy. It destroys ships, which is a good thing. It creates tension and drama, which is a good thing. It keeps the game from getting boring, which is a good thing. If you are 100% safe all the time, can do what you want without having to worry about anybody attacking you, after a while it gets extremely stale and lacks challenge.
There’s nothing wrong with adding some risk to force people to be on their toes. And I would argue that just as many folks left because of nerfs to ganking as left because of ganking itself.
You know that I’ve argued until I was blue in the face about not judging other people’s playstyles in terms of making decisions about game mechanics. I’ve advocated on behalf of tons of players who play the game completely differently than I do, and I’ll still do that. But that doesn’t mean that I really understand why they play the game the way they do, which was the genesis of my question.
For folks who want to PvP, I don’t understand the desire to stay in space that makes PvP next to impossible without jumping through an absurd number of hoops when there are areas of space where you can do the same thing without the red tape. That was the point of what I was saying. Aiko likes to PvP in highsec, because she doesn’t think she can get PvP anywhere else. That’s a weird view to me, given I’ve spent most of my career getting plenty of PvP everywhere but highsec.
In my view, trying to get PvP in highsec is like wanting a glass of milk, so you go and buy a plot of land, grow some grass, buy a cow, breed the cow, let the cow eat the grass, then go outside and milk it so you can get your glass of milk. That’s fine - you can get a glass of milk that way.
The rest of us just go to the store and buy a bottle of milk.
Both are ways to get a glass of milk, but the first way requires a ■■■■ ton of hoops that you don’t really have to go through (and I don’t want to get into an argument about how somebody somewhere has to milk the cows for the guy to get a bottle from the store - don’t fight the hypo).
That’s an easy fix, go mining without a permit.
1 Like
I’m aware, in theory, that there are other parts of the game. It’s a question of people. Everybody I know is in Highsec. I am currently in lowsec, and there is nobody here. I have scouts in every adjacent system, and there is nobody there. Yes, I could keep going, and I’m sure I will. Eventually, I will discover nullsec, like a conquistadora on the great frontier. I will be the greatest capsuleer, in any and every sec. However, it’s only natural that I identify with the people that I know, and where they currently are.
I personally think CCP should delete Highsec.
Jita must burn.
1 Like
Yes, and thank you for doing that.
The point I am making is, at a flick of a switch CCP can make highsec as dangerous as 2009 again, and suddenly the first half of this paragraph doesn’t really apply because “it just makes more sense” when you have easy wardecs, plenty of cans to flip pre-specialized-holds, and friendly fire legal targets abound. I’m sure a reasonable person as yourself would agree it “makes more sense” even if still not your preferred playstyle due to these hoops still existing — despite being relaxed hoops.
This sliding scale of “whether it makes sense to me” is just a proxy metric to the degree to which people are being Stockholm’d into CCP’s view of how players “should” play in a rigid conformist way, instead of engaging the sandbox on their own freely-to-never-be-understood terms.
1 Like
Gankers also create value. If HS were 100% safe, the value of HS resources would drop dramatically. Ice would lose at least 50% of its value if you could just mine AFK without fear of a kiss from Aiko and her merry band of fun makers.
Others ore would also drop in value, as there would be substantially less risk, so miners would all be using optimized harvesting fits, rather than using T2 gear and tank.
No ganking makes the PVE activities worth less, as there is substantially less value if they are risk free.
1 Like
if you want to have fun, try Misaba
A small number of people like doing it. A larger number of people don’t like being the target. I’d like a few text boxes and a button in game where I can type in a name, some questions and answers, click the button and it sets a self-destruct on that persons ship that they can only stop by answering the questions. There, that destroys ships, creates tension and drama and keeps the game from getting boring. I look forward to you championing this idea to CCP.
The point being made is that you personally liking a mechanic and thinking it’s good for the game doesn’t mean it objectively is. I think it’s boring that I have to fit ships in certain ganker-approved ways, stare at local and constantly hammer d-scan just to shoot rats or rocks for tiny rewards.
There’s nothing wrong with adding risk, but there’s something wrong with having that risk controlled by other players who themselves face very little risk and who target newer players.
Who left because of ganking nerfs? All the people I’ve seem saying that they’ll leave if ganking is nerfed still seem to be here. Some don’t seem to gank anymore but they all seem to be here crying about people who disagree with them.
That’s where CCP is headed. I’ve had many miners contact me, with concern that their income will continue to drop, as bot farmers turbomine with increasing safety. New player retention will decline, because that new player in a Venture can’t compete against a swarm of boosted Hulks.
Increased security punishes PvE players who are alert, fitting their ship properly, and playing the game actively. Skill becomes worthless, because it is no longer necessary for survival. Increased security only benefits bots, lazy autopiloters, and crybaby whiners, but it won’t benefit Highsec miners.
6 Likes
Admit it, you secretly love being ganked
1 Like
I don’t think they do.
Why would ice lose 50% of its value? From what I can see most highsec ice gets mined away anyway so unless CCP added a lot more ice I don’t know how the value could drop substantially. Other low end ore may drop in value, but I’m sure it would balance out as people would seek higher profit somewhere else if profit drops too low.
Do you have any reliable figures that could back up your assumptions?
You certainly aren’t the brightest bulb.
It’s easily verified that there has been a twenty percent decline in the value of white glaze over the past year, with a nearly eighty percent increase in cost of PLEX. This means, to PLEX their account, Highsec ice miners must increase production 120%. Most people don’t want to do this, which erodes player retention.
Reduced isk/hr profitability incentivizes botting, and discourages actual humans from playing. The only way to improve profitability is to increase risk (via ganking), which rewards active gameplay and disincentivizes botting.
Over the next few months, CCP will lose a lot of newbro miners, who are bored out of their mind, and cannot compete with the local Hulk blob. Likewise, they will lose newbro haulers, who can’t find lucrative contracts because expanded AFK autopiloting freighters will move everything without risk. Furthermore, CCP will lose newbro PvE crabs, as the value of ratting will decline because battleships face less risk. These people will not make forum posts, Reddit posts, or open letters to the CSM. They will just quietly quit, and CCP will wonder where all the new players are going.
Destruction ensures industry has value, and efforts to reduce risk will reduce player retention. Ganking and non-consensual PvP are prohibited on the test server, but PvE and mining are allowed. You only need to look at the player count on Singularity to see what direction CCP is headed as they restrict PvP content on Tranquility.
11 Likes
Highsec mining isn’t a way to plex an account.
In what way is botting disincentivized by ganking? Gankers don’t target bots.
What proof do you have that newbros will get bored and leave?
When have you ever gone after the “local hulk blob”. Whenever you gank miners it’s players in poor, cobbled together fits.
Destruction does ensure industry has value, but that most of that destruction does not come from ganking.
Common sense.
How many people do PvE on the risk free Singularity server?
Nobody does that, not even you.
2 Likes
So no proof then.
Serenity gets peaks of like 10k, and serenity has never been as big as TQ, nothing to do with risk.
Note- Aiko was originally talking about “Serenity” but has since stealth edited to change her posts to talk about “Singularity”.