Assembly Hall

I just noticed this. I have 3 accounts, 2 of my characters are in nullsec, the rest are in hisec doing various things.

80% of the accounts may stay in hisec, it's not 80% of the players though.

Confirming that all my disposable scout/cyno alts are in highsec, doing... what exactly?

Non-playing disposable alts are placed where your actual characters don't want to be - that would be lowsec, not highsec or null.

I live in lowsec, and I have a cyno alt (that is now repurposed into a hauling alt). I have 2 extra character slots each on both my cyno account and main account. That's 4 random characters that are sitting in market hubs for quick price checks. I consider myself a lowsec player even though 83.5% of my actual characters are parked in highsec right now.


I am also starting up a corp that has 90% taxes for people who think kittens are cute. Join up unless you are anti kitten! Also the kittens demand that you farm incursions non stop.


If you want highsec to have less risk then it needs less rewards. Kill highsec incursions. Only have veldspar and scordite in the belts, move level 4 missions to lowsec. Do that and then you can have your invincible hulks.

Or we could give highsec more risk and more reward. Then not only would it be a place worth living in, but if people wanted to transition to low, null, w-space then they'd have to get used to fewer new risks. Basically a safer highsec creates a bigger barrier to try any other type of space.


Some more interesting missions would be nice, and improving the new player experience would really help. The one thing eve needs is something to do when you are alone. All the group content is great, but sometimes everyone you know is signed off or just doing something else.


I am guessing you are talking about the LP store. The LP store is a good thing. First if solves a lot of isk faucet problems (because LP is essentially just gear waiting to exist). Also rather than just making it rain isk it means the market value of your LP stuff is based on how many people are running any given site. If the Sisters of Eve only gave out LP that could be spent on Sisters probes and launchers then their price would be dependent on how many people were farming Sisters Of Eve missions. The demand for probes stays the same but the supply changes based on how many people are running the missions.

I'm sure there's supposed to be a point there, somewhere, in that post.

While I agree that most of these, ahem "demands" are pretty silly, I also agree that there really is no voice for hisec players. I remember the last CSM election and not seeing any candidate who wasn't ultimately just a lobbyist for one nullsec alliance or another.

I've seen this problem in other games. For example, back before WW2OL was merely circling the drain and not diving headlong into it, they had a player run "High Command" system composed of players who acted as major domos and ran the campaigns. The problem, though, is that all of these "HC" were little more than front men for their own respective "squads" (clan, guild, alliance - same thing, different names). The result was that instead of actually running the campaign (i.e. their jobs) they just prattled around like a bunch of courtiers to get more of their own "squaddies" into the program & whine for the developers to change things to they way they, themselves, wanted it and to hell with everyone else.

Sound familiar?

The problem, I believe, is a similar lack of requirements for what a player must do to be a CSM. Right now it's pretty much "Do you own a passport Y/N?" There is no actual rule against a current council member from buying their kid brother/sister a subscription & a passport, then telling everyone in their alliance to vote for that twerp the very next day. Considering the size of some alliances, this is not as improbable as it seems.

Frankly, I'd like to see the CSM positions be less about administrative garbage and more about various aspects of the game. There are nine CSM positions, last I checked. Why can't one of them be dedicated solely to voicing the concerns of hisec players? You could have a nullsec rep, a lowsec rep, and a hisec rep and still have six seats open to shuffle Powerpoint slides & pretend to be important while getting drunk in Iceland for two weeks a year.

Would that be unfair to ask for?

The thread on Hulkageddon showed the sharp division in the community.

At a blunt level, Highsec needs CSM votes. Not just getting the attention of the null sec crowd who don't really care, but its own voice on the CSM itself. But to those who ridicule highsec players, know only this: CCP wants more players. They are not going to get them without increasing Highsec player retention, so guess what, changes are going to happen whether you like it or not.

I don't really understand why you need a corporation to promote these objectives, nor am I certain they are desirable objectives.

1) Less griefing: How do you define griefing? Griefing is already considered a bannable offence. A pirate in high sec ganking my industrial full of plex is NOT griefing, it's an opportunistic and skillful heist. A pirate corp declaring war on my corp and blowing up my ships is NOT griefing either, nor is ganking the Hulk of a high sec miner. All of these mechanisms have been placed in the game to insure an atmosphere of combat, danger and intrigue.

What IS griefing? If that same pirate or pirate corp comes after me (specifically) again and again and again, attacks me in the forums, harasses me through eve mails, sends letters to all my corp mates warning them that I am a 'so and so', and generally stalks me beyond a week long corporate war declaration, then THAT would be considered griefing, and THAT is a bannable offence.

2) No power item shop: Do you mean Loyalty points shops? I don't understand how removing them would be an improvement. They are a reward for running missions for a corporation anywhere, from high sec to null. These items can be used or sold for ISK.

3) More highsec/ PvE content: Aren't there a ton of missions you could do? Research & Development missions can make you pretty good passive ISK since Research agents turn out datacores 24/ 7. You can sell those datacores, or use them for invention.

There's also incursions to run, and high sec exploration sites, as well as station trading which can make a ton of ISK.

High sec is already far too crowded. The objective is to get more people out of high-sec, and into low-sec and Null-sec where (ideally) they face more danger, but can also make more ISK and have more fun. This is what many people object to when they complain about 'carebears'. It's not that people can mine, manufacture, and run missions in high-sec, it's that these people want to be able to do so with some sort of guarantee that they will never be attacked ever.

This is not what EVE is about. It's not supposed to be a game of 'making lots of ISK' in complete safety.

My understanding of high-sec is that it is a high-tech authoritarian police state that most people would want to leave.

-The government of Amarr is a theocratic hierarchical fiefdom. It's ruled over by an Empress and the Aristocratic holders. They practice slavery and torture, and would probably arrest someone whose views on the scriptures were different from the official views of the Theoretical council.

-The government of the Caldari state is a Corporate oligarchy. Everything within that society is dictated by a dozen or so powerful mega-corporations, which own and control everything. Caldari citizens are born into their corporations, are raised and educated by their corporations, and are essentially citizens of their corporations. Benito Mussolini said that "Fascism should be called corporatism, since it is the merging of state and corporate powers." So really, the political system of the Caldari state would be closer to Fascism than anything else.

-Minmatar society would be fractional, a loose band of different cultures and tribes. They have joined together for a single purpose, but with no external threat would likely wage war on each other. Maybe the Minmatar people would have more freedom than the Amarrians or Caldari but I imagine there would still be checkpoints, body scans, cargo scans, as well as an internal security force to weed out spies and so forth.

-Gallente society is apparently the most free and democratic. I'm not sure, but I assume that their democracy would be a representative democracy similar to North America and Europe. Each planet probably has a President, and those Presidents would sit together on a 'Council of worlds' to decide the policy of the Gallente state.

There is nothing in game to suggest that you could form an 'international' convention of 'high sec residents'. The four factions are at constant war with each other. There is no trust, no dialogue between the high-sec nations. This is the way that most EVE players like it. Constant conflict.

Take a look at the market place. All of the items there are weapons and/or defensive modules. Everything in EVE revolves around war and combat. The reason miners are able to sell their minerals, manufacturers are able to sell ships and modules, is because ships keep blowing each other up. Remove that element from EVE and the incentive grinds to a halt.

It's over folks he rage quit the project, it lasted only eight days. read his reasons for yourself. Just remember, "it was perfect in every possible way"

http://greedygoblin.blogspot.com/2012/06/you-cant-help-m.html

Not much can be done except stopping being so defeatist and not being so bad at organizing yourselves. You people keep claiming that 75% of all characters live in hisec, it really shouldn't be all that hard to find even just one candidate (which isn't xenuria-level weirdola), and push him forth to "hisec saviour fame".

Which nullsec alliance was Issler Dainze mouthpiecing for?