As much as I wouldn’t mind in the slightest if a suspect flag is the result in highsec (but only for the higher tier sites, not the lowest one), I don’t think CCP will end up doing that.
It feels a bit cheesy to be suspect, just for running a PVE site.
So I suspect in the end, it’ll be a restriction on space the different tier sites can be run, though if it is a suspect flag, it should also apply to lowsec.
But in the end, I think CCP will settle on restricting the space for the different tiers.
So much I like the suspect flag from the hunter perspective, I do agree that it just doesn’t make sense, and can be very oppressing on highsec runners.
My preferred solution would have a real split and difference of spaces. Highsec gets only the low end, and level 1 exclusive. Null the middle tiers, and finally lowsec the high end tiers exclusive. No use in wormhole space.
I think this is the only sane balancing if players are allowed to decide where to start a journey.
Limiting the quality of sites in the game’s second safest space would be just another slap to the face of highseccers. It would fit CCP’s attitude and would be detrimental to the game in the long run, so business as usual…
Frankly, I see them tanking in high and becoming another step in the wrong direction of letting the whole game revolve around nullsec alone.
CCP doesn’t haves the galls to favor highsec without gifting a free blowjob and massage to nullsec. And the only answer a sensible highseccer has to this is to screw CCP and quit playing. If customers are not welcome, let the company have it.
You need to balance a feature with the sec space in mind. If you would give unrestricted equal access to the new sites from everywhere without drawbacks, everybody would just run them in highsec with almost complete PvP-safety. There would be no reason to run them elsewhere. Also this would wreck loot value, making the whole thing pointless. Bad game design.
It wouldn’t be a slap to anyone. It would be an incentive, not a punishment. An incentive that would encourage activity in lowsec.
All the way you look at it I guess, but the glass half empty is also half full, etc.
And nothing about the best sites only being available in lowsec stops people who call themselves “highseccers” from running them. They absolutely can if they want. They just have to accept the additional risk in doing so.
Best in low sec would be fine. But high should not be penalised below null. It should be equal in this case.
Sure null should be overall better but it doesn’t need to be better at every single thing. It can even be worse than high at some things. Because it’s a multiplicative game. And the more factors it’s better at the more it becomes an exponential game difference.
And no high sec players can’t just make up 15 years of history and production under different rules to catch up now.
It’s still yet another slapdown to highsec if null gets better results despite being in a better position to farm these to start with.
So yes it is fair to call it a penalty to highsec if it yet again gets left even further behind.
Seriously. Trotting out the platitudes is a joke. You either know it or are so blinded by self interest.
Ccp keeps hammering highsec with the changes in the last few years. There have been the odd bones thrown but high sec players have become systematically worse off in relation.
It’s nothing to do with not helping each other etc. And I’m sure you know that.
Nothing makes someone a “highsec player” other than themselves. It’s a self imposed restriction and it always comes with a sense of entitlement and a whole heap of whining.
Apparently yes. Which makes all this partisan wrangling an amusing waste of time. A 10-15 minute vulnerability that needs to be scanned down means the will be nearly perfectly safe everywhere. There is indeed a slight risk of a someone stumbling across you, but given you get to decide when and where to open a site, you can minimize that risk to near zero in several ways everywhere. So basically the CSM has failed to get CCP to make these into a viable conflict driver.
They probably should follow the standard paradigm of having tiers just for consistency and to account for the extreme safety of using them in highsec, but let’s not dwell on this too much like they are there to create conflict or will do so. They are just another nearly perfectly safe resource fountain to keep the the farmers logging in to compulsively gather more stuff.
And there go the insults.
It’s not entitlement to want ccp to follow their initial and long term claims of all sectors of space being different and interdependent with suitable advantages and gameplay styles to all of them.
Something they have been steadily eroding and more and more funnelling everything into null.
But hey. You just keep up insulting people. I’m sure it will work great for the long term.
First thing that is wrong here: solo instance (in multiplayer game?). This is what cause the first problem and produce more of them. I don’t even talk about reforging modules because this is impossible to balance.
I think you don’t understand the point. Rewards should match the actual risk, and null being the safest space, they should not get the best rewards. Neither highsec, which is second safest compared to null, should get the worst rewards.
Maybe should be two tiers: higher chances for low and wormholes and slightly lower chances for high and null. Although I think that everybody should get the same rewards for undertaking PvE in their chosen risk level.
But then, you bet null is gonna get the ohmyeffinjesusridingraptorchrist rewards and high will be left to suck somebody’s sweaty balls because “balance”. And lowsec will be told as usual “here’s a spade but no bucket, now go eff yourself”.
Highsec is safe because the game keeps us all safe there. I play (hauling) in highsec almost every day.
Nullsec is safe because players keep each other safe. I’m not a member of a large sov alliance. I do play in null however, and lowsec, and jspace as well.
So no, I don’t miss the point, I just firmly sit in the group that believes safety should come from players working together, not because the game provides for it, and I also firmly believe that people who restrict themselves to highsec do so through a personal choice. Nothing about the game prevents someone from going into lowsec, or null, or jspace.
If you restrict yourself, then that’s on you.
On top of that, where have I claimed null should get the greatest rewards?
Personally I am not keen on this concept at all, I will however wait to see how it pans out and see what level of improvement they actually apply…
@Scipio_Artelius you should not do the whining comments, aren’t people with high SP and good PvP abilities operating in hisec and whining about the restrictions in hisec which favor casual players just as bad. In fact in my book they are worse.
@Yiole_Gionglao in nullsec you have to defend your space which means sorting yourself out one fine and dandy capital fleet with the need to cover losses to boot, it is an entirely different scale of play from hisec. Any safety is carved out by the players themselves.