I’m writing this topic as a suggestion which came to my mind when I saw that EVE creators have been trying to make the gameplay flow in the way that high sec should really be safe… Atleast safer than null sec.
Here’s my first suggestion: create null sec systems into wh randomly… Access to stations and resources stay with the corp which holds it but entry and exits are using wh only. And it would have atleast 4 wh opening where one would be to the nearest low sec, other to the randomly one of the two null sec stations to which the system was initially connected. And the other two just like any other wh could lead to any space or wh.
This phenomenon should happen randomly once the sun in the system has exhausted and released all its energy(like supernova and black dwarf and black holes, etc.) and so no sun in the system and hence the shift.
Also, the adjacent systems to the one becoming a wh should get connected to each other to keep the system links intact.
Secondly, there could be a shift of the security status of low sec systems and null sec systems. The low sec status should shift three-four systems into the null sec and then back to their original location so that this creates a shift in the mindsets of the players who always are standing at the border low sec for ratting and pvp. While the null sec systems become of low security status, the low sec should become high sec or null sec randomly.
Here we would like not to touch the existing high sec systems but playing with the null sec and low sec so that the high sec maintains that secure area/safe zone status and the low sec and null sec become more and more challenging and dangerous.
And just imagine how much it would be fun to randomly add and remove the null sec blackout period during this whole thing.
Thanks all for reading. Like to hear more views and suggestions regarding the same from you all as well.
This seems a little dubious. The New Order of highsec has been going strong for over seven years. And before them new players were regularly welcomed to the Battle Royale universe by being ganked by some other player. Like, that’s part of the core game play so it has to happen sometime to a new player, and notably Eve grew fine and fast during all of these ganks. Maybe even faster when there were more viable criminal mechanics to allow players to interact.
But as to the OP. Shifting, but more stable connections and dynamic security status for systems seem like good ideas on the top level. Building and balancing them is always the issue, but more change and player agency is a good thing.
I’m not sure CCP has the time or energy for that anymore, but maybe once they stop spending most of their energy on the new player experience, they can add something like that to the game.
You mean like privately-run WHs? Where a corp finds one, goes in, closes the entry points as they appear randomly and holds the resources etc while they are in there?
CCP looked into that years ago and found no connection between ganking and new players leaving. The big majority already quits the game long before they leave the protected starter systems.
There is little I can do here if you are incapable of understanding what was said and multiple people tried to explain it to you already over the years.
The video in question contains a statement about the reasons people cite when unsubing and that is about All players that unsub, not just < 30 days old.
The issue is you continuing to post and present the actual facts of that CCP Rise presentation completely out of context.
The funny thing is you trying to use that 5 year old presentation as a rebuttal towards someone who posted a negative comment about CODE and ganking who never said anything about new players.
As for the CCP Rise presentation stats, that was 80,000 different accounts they checked for deaths during their first 15 days in Eve.
Stop trying to change the actual subject, this was about you using a 5 year old CCP Rise presentation about new players which you presented out of context to refute somebody’s negative comment about CODE ganking in general.
I don’t care how much you post this new statement of yours, you originally used a 5 year old CCP Rise presentation about new players and presented it out of context to refute somebody’s negative comment about CODE ganking in general.
I already addressed this by telling you that the talk also contained a comment about subscription cancelation that has nothing yo do with new players. Why are you still stuck on that first comment? I don’t think it is super hard to understand what I wrote.
