Test Server Feedback

Of course they were designed above else for exploration, namely w-space. That their modular structure allows them to be effective in many other roles is undisputed.

What exactly does that mean? Are you telling us that the signature count on SiSi is vastly reduced in high-sec compared to current state on Tranqulity? :(

http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Project_Snapshot

there's a lot to read there - but the basic gist is that a snapshot of wormholes across all of high sec space was done, and the predicted number of K162s was much lower than expected - 6.5 stdevs from the expected result using a binomial distribution. it supports the theory that the exit side of a high sec static (from a WH system) doesn't actually materialize until it's scanned down the from the inside*

the reduced number of signatures/WHs on the test server would most likely be explained by this fact, along with the realization that it's unlikely that a wormhole resident would log onto the test server only to stay inside their wormhole, mimicking their routines - they'll likely get to empire to try out the new stuff.

so basically it's just the lack of active wormhole residents scanning down exits to high sec on a daily basis like they do on TQ.

* - the deviation from the expected value on TQ is speculated to be due to the fact that a lot of class 1 wormholes with high sec statics are not occupied, so their exit WHs simply do not appear in high sec at all.

Forget about amount of signatures on SiSi, I'd still like some dev word on the original topic of this thread.

Blinded by your prejudices, bound by your narrow mind?

I want to make hisec safer and more rewarding for new players so they stay in the game long enough to understand it, and emphasize hisecs role as the tutorial area. I'd like new players to see low, null and wormholes as opportunities to experience the sandbox, complete and amazing with all it's intangible rewards, and look forward to the day when they are ready to handle it.

Hisec mechanics are necessary for creating a safe zone for new players who don't yet have any social contacts in the game. However, they also limit the gameplay options available. Operating within these limitations and chasing the rewards familiar from other, different games results in a shallow experience, I'd just like to improve the chances that everybody gets to taste the depth of this unique virtual universe.

Hisec as it is attracts players who want nothing to do with the sandbox, and the rift between this group and the core EVE playerbase is unproductive for everyone. CCP is stuck between their customers, who love their galactic sandbox and desire for more sand and others to build and destroy sandcastles with, and those who want just another generic MMO but with spaceships.

If you want to see low & nullseccers as evil zealots, I can't help you. It's up to you to open your eyes.

I really don't understand why people always say 'EVE is a sandbox' or 'This is EVE' when they try to tell others that their way should be the only way. Some how they seems to be misunderstanding what a sandbox means.

'Hi-Sec as tutorial area' really made me laugh. Someone just tried to say that we shouldn't live in cities, all of us should live in wildland/desert fortresses. I guess what he meant to say was that roaming around in the wilderness is more lucrative/thrilling. But, that is assuming that every one is here for the fun and thrill of PvP combat. To each, his own. If you remember that small statement, it would reduce at least some of the resentment that low/null sec players hold towards the hi sec 'care-bears'. For the resentment the other way around, people should really have to stop suicide-ganking and griefing. As that is not going to happen (and I am not sure that I want it to happen - something to do with reducing available content), I am not saying anything more on that.

The change to the DED complexes are understandable, but still a bit saddening. Not serious enough to debate so much about. As some one mentioned, if not T3s, then HACs, then something else. But, one has to agree that HACs are nowhere as much fun as T3s. To me, it was instant love when I first read the ship info of tengu. I sold my only mission ship (CNR) to get one. From then on, it was a journey through high, low, null and wh (yeah, like you didn't jump in to a BC when you just had BC lvl 1). I even looked up off peak hours in null systems to be safe. Got jumped once and ran back to high with my then un-replaceable ship. Didn't venture into low with it till I got a replacement. Fun days :)

I'm not blinded by anything except for the breathtaking arrogance of people like you. You are a hypocrite and a bigot.

You might want to look up the term "sandbox" as it applies to videogames or, speak to a developer about their intentions for high sec. It was never intended to be just a starter area for newbies to do a few tutorials in and then move on. If that were CCP's intent, they would have made it so.

FYI, I'm heavily involved in faction warfare and have been for years. I also run an industrial production center in low sec for my corporation. I spend as much time in low sec as I do in high. I'm intimately familiar with the mechanics and I've been involved with PVP since I was a newbie so, don't try laying your condescending, moralizing bullshit on me. I don't see everyone who plays in low or null as a zealot, just people like you who hate the fact that someone else who's paying their hard earned money to CCP each month has the audacity to play the game differently than you.

Try getting this through your head; people who want to remain in high sec are valuable paying customers the same as you. Their play style is equally valid. Their choice to play the game in high sec is completely valid. What the hell gives you the right to judge? What gives you the right to decide how others should experience Eve? If someone misses out on "the depth of this unique virtual universe", that's their choice, not yours.

Open your own damned eyes. Quit trying to force your preferences on others.

Seems like no one ever believe what I said about signature reduce. It doesn't matter, I wouldn't expect you to believe everything from my mouth, but at least you should believe your own eyes. I have said more than once to let you try it yourselves. Fly 20 systems randomly and calculate the signatures you meet, all of them, including abnomalies. Then you will understand why I am so insist on this.

Perhaps if a minority of overly vocal and opinionated low & nullseccers on these forums didn't act like entitled and whiny 'Nerf highsec because those players offend my sensibilities and CCP mechanics won't let me endlessly grief them whenever I want™' crybabies, then that opinion of them wouldn't exist. These people also seem to forget that a large number of alts exist in highsec for the express purpose of making ISK in order to fund PvP and other activities on other characters.

The simple fact is that CCP subs increased dramatically since highsec and CONCORD was introduced, something people seem to have forgotten. Before that, EVE was very low population and CCP weren't in a particularly stable place as a company. If you reduce highsec to being completely unprofitable in a ham-fisted attempt to force those people into areas of the game they don't want, then be prepared to see subscriptions plummet and take responsibility upon yourselves for the subsequent loss of revenue and jobs at CCP.

The past is the past, and you cannot force players in a subscription-based computer game to play in a way they don't find fun or at least entertaining. History has shown that with SW:G, if any of you remember that little mistake and the subsequent exodus and eventual closure. The opinions of EVE players really are the biggest threat to the survival of the game and CCP.

Highsec is fine as it is. If lowsec isn't profitable then buff lowsec in some way, quit the constant cries for 'nerf x' - we'll be getting more than enough nerfs in Odyssey without more being thrust upon us.

This is where you get told to adapt or die.

Welcome to EvE