Player Features and Ideas Discussion

So your answer is what, "I don't know."?

Easiest way to make all space more security response dynamic is basing it on non player assets values. So in "Mid sec" high value untapped belts etc would mean a faster respons from concord, if depleted it slows down, so mining or ratting etc would not be "entirely" safe in mid sec.. In low sec the roles are reversed the higher the value content the slower the concord respons and the stronger the rats.

Diminishing returns, free markets and dynamic content pushed around by player activity should be in all mechanics designs.

Also this would mean a lot more contesting of space and activity types in systems..

In addition it would be useful if roid respawns were on a 30 days/month cycle but belt size/content and value was increased by around 25 times. Only Noob systems would be respawning daily and T2 gear would be contraband, to reduce griefing and old player depletion abuse..

Oh, that's simple.

Because there are other areas of the game. Highsec should not get special treatment merely because the trade hubs are there to increase population density.

One area of the game should not be allowed to prosper at the detriment of all four of the others (I count NPC null as it's own area for various reasons).

Highsec is not the game, and the game is not highsec. And honestly, if your mentality is what you described, then you are just holding the game hostage against any real growth anyway, which will lead to it's inevitable death regardless of what CCP does.

They've taken steps to shake things up everywhere else in the game. It'll be your turn sooner or later.

Remove apex force from lowsec.

Or, slightly less harsh(since Battleships are so freaking slow), make individual agents run out of missions after say, six, in a 24 hour period.

Make it dynamic, something you have to move around for, as opposed to being entirely static like they are right now.

In time we will see if there is any truth to these things.

In the mean time CCP has repeatedly added nerfs to the high sec income capabilities, over my years in the game there have been
Reductions in LP and ISK payouts for missions.
Then they removed the materials drops from rouge drones and replaced it with metal scraps.
Then there was the huge change to reprocessing that dropped the max efficiency from 100% to somewhere around 60%.
Then they changed the loot and salvage drop tables in missions lowering income even more.
Then they changed exploration by making it easier, because it was easier and more players were doing it they changed the loot / salvage tables dropping earning power in high sec even farther.
Still not happy with the income restrictions and in part to appease the nul sec players they changed the low level ore distributions in nul sec to make it easier for them and no doubt it was done as a potential nerf to high sec incomes as well.

Have any of these changes taken players out of high sec and moved them into the wilds of low or into nul sec in significant numbers? Not really, in my experience it has driven dozens of players I know out of the game but only a very few have decided to move to low or nul. In fact what all of these changes have done is drive players to the blitz style of missions as a means of replacing the income that was taken away. Nerfs to income are a stick used to try and beat people out of one game play style and move them into a different game play style. They have been a dismal failure every time they have been tried and they will continue to be a dismal failure if they are tried again. If you want players out of high sec then CCP needs to change low and nul to make them a place that players want to go to and want to be in.

To repeat making high sec less profitable, making it more dangerous will not drive players into low and nul it will simply drive them out of the game, and whether you like it is not relevant CCP needs those subscription fees as badly as they need yours.

A short detour to explain my nul sec ore comment from above Yes I agree with nul sec players it made little sense for those who are supposed to live in a self sufficient world to have to go to high sec for your ore needs so in that regard I agree that the changes were good. On the other hand I still think the ability to further nerf high sec incomes was a factor in the decision as well.

It's pretty easy to make lowsex the place to be.

Step 1. Drifters enter incursions sites - sometimes they wipe out all the Sansha ships and sometimes the wipe out all they player ships.

Step 2. Dial back level 4 missions a bit (60% should do it).

Step 3. Remove system upgrades from SOV null.

Step 4. Make it so the only way to produce the new gimmick ships.... er T2 destroyers is to get parts that come specifically from the far reaches of lowsex (faction them out, some of the parts only come from one region and other parts from other regions). For a better effect: tie all T2 production to getting parts from the far reaches of lowsex.


Follow these 4 simple steps and most players will be living in lowsex w/in 2 years.


Here's the thing about 'forcing' folks to move - no one likes to be pushed around w/ a hot poker.

Here's the thing to incentivising w/ carrots - it's already been done w/ SOV upgrades (there is no such thing as bas space anymore), incursions and missions. I mean, what would CCP have to offer to get folks to stop farming incursions/anoms because farming lowsex is better??? Incetives have already been overdone.


Just make more ways for pvp to be fun, interesting and meainingful and all will be well.

Yes it's rather funny that on the on hand CCP emphasizes the sandbox, and on the other obsesses that people do not play the game they way they 'want' it to be played.

If they just left people to do want they want they'd go to low sec and null sec on their own

Oh you are so wrong on this, I have enjoyed 6 marvelous years in this game, I have met and talked to 100's maybe even a 1,000 or more players from all over the world. Many of them have become friends in real life and even though they checked out of the game years ago we still have the friendships, the experiences shared and we still talk to one another to this day. If CCP changes the game to the point that I no longer find any enjoyment then I will simply quit and find something else to do with my time with no regrets being much wiser about the real world around me and with a great many friends from places around the world that I would never have met if it were not for Eve. If the future of the game brings new challenges and new opportunities for me to explore and enjoy then I will continue this journey making new friends with new experiences shared.

Your bias is clearly showing here as is your lack of a historical base for your comments.
I am not by any means an old timer but even going back to 2009 when I started my first character the vast majority of the characters in the game called high sec home. Based on the information that has been made available over the years low and nul combined have NEVER had as many characters active in them as high sec. So it is obvious at least from the beginning for me anyway it is clear that a lot of players prefer the lower hassle and relative safety of high sec to the other areas of space.

To your contention that high sec is safer now than years past that is your opinion. To me it is neither more or less safe now than in 2009, what has changed is the nature of the threats caused by other players.
Even if we accept your assessment that high sec is safer now than it was in 2009 who is to blame for those changes?
You are quick to point the finger at the so called "risk averse whinny care bears" but in the end they are not the ones designing the game, releasing new features or curbing some activities while buffing others. If CCP has sided with those carebears and made high sec more safe then the lesson for you is that CCP will at least to a point do what they need to do to protect ALL of their players.

Another of your contentions is that the game needs to be more dangerous overall and they need to nerf or outright get rid of a lot of the not shooting other players in the face aspects, and yet CCP recently released a road map that will put even more emphasis on the industrial (not shooting other players in the face) aspects of the game. Are we to blame the whinny carebears for this as well, or is it simply that your personal opinions on what the game needs are completely out of sync with CCP's vision?