These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Why the hate for Hi-Sec players?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Cpt Roghie
Chemical Invasion Co.
#121 - 2012-05-31 14:34:21 UTC
Drei Ontalas wrote:
Velicitia wrote:
Drei Ontalas wrote:


My idea, as unfleshed out as it is, is that this "bubble" would seed players into the rest of EVE where they could find more enagaging game play. I admit that it requires more thought, particularly as to how it might impact on the wider economy, but would it have an overall negative impact on other players? The dog-eat-dog aspect of the rest of the Universe wouldn't change.


Let's say you're a nullsec alliance leader, and you need 250 million trit. you could mine it in nullsec, where it's dangerous ... OR you simply mine it in (or buy it from) hisec, where it's 100% safe, and jump it directly to where you need it to be.

NOW do you see why it's a problem?


1.Wouldn't everyone else just get it in the same way? They would still have to transport it all the way to null so the effort is not really reduced.

2. You can't really do much with tritanium by itself. There are many things that cannot be sourced from hi-sec originally. Tritanium can be but morphite can't . So on and so forth...



1. Jump freighters.

This could be fun.
Haulie Berry
#122 - 2012-05-31 14:47:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Haulie Berry
Drei Ontalas wrote:
1. In these forums there appears to be this notion that Hi-sec players should move (by force or encouragement) to lower-sec space. Why?

If a player is happy mining scordite in 1.0 space why is that a problem?


It's not.

Quote:
If a player like to sit in Jita making trades why is that a problem?


It's not.

Quote:
If a player prefers to do hi-sec missions what is the problem?


There isn't one.

Quote:

2. I am genuinely interested in establishing where/how the hostility towards hi-sec comes from. From my admittedly limitedly experience it seems so come down to the EVE equivalent of "Mommy he won't play with me! Make him!"

Am I completely off the mark?


The problem isn't what they do in high security. The problem is the belief in a right to - and ceaseless campaigning for - the ability to be able to do that in absolute safety from engagement with the rest of the universe.

I will note, here, that the trader is actually an exception - that player is already participating in (and possibly thriving on) a form of PvP.

The miner mining scordite in a 1.0 system, though, is directly impacting the rest of the game. They are introducing new minerals to the market. This is okay, as long as the rest of the game can have an impact on the miner, as well - and it can. When the miner discovers that the rest of the game gets to affect him - often in a rather expensive fashion - the common impulse is to run to the forums and demand, in the abstract, that they should be able to affect the rest of the players in the game without having to worry about being affected by those players in turn.

The same goes for the mission runner who is injecting Isk and LP items into the economy.

It is not WHAT they are doing that anyone has a problem with - it is the hypocrisy of expecting that they have a right to affect the rest of us without being affected themselves that is the source of the ire.
Spikeflach
Perkone
Caldari State
#123 - 2012-05-31 15:35:04 UTC
Velicitia wrote:


Let's say you're a nullsec alliance leader, and you need 250 million trit. you could mine it in nullsec, where it's dangerous ... OR you simply mine it in (or buy it from) hisec, where it's 100% safe, and jump it directly to where you need it to be.

NOW do you see why it's a problem?


If only nullsec was this dangerous place, and if only alliances didn't already get most of their building materials from hi-sec.

Problem is not hi sec, problem is the 0.0 alliances refuse to use the tools to get their minerals from the space they own.
Spikeflach
Perkone
Caldari State
#124 - 2012-05-31 15:43:54 UTC
Haulie Berry wrote:


The problem isn't what they do in high security. The problem is the belief in a right to - and ceaseless campaigning for - the ability to be able to do that in absolute safety from engagement with the rest of the universe.

I will note, here, that the trader is actually an exception - that player is already participating in (and possibly thriving on) a form of PvP.

The miner mining scordite in a 1.0 system, though, is directly impacting the rest of the game. They are introducing new minerals to the market. This is okay, as long as the rest of the game can have an impact on the miner, as well - and it can. When the miner discovers that the rest of the game gets to affect him - often in a rather expensive fashion - the common impulse is to run to the forums and demand, in the abstract, that they should be able to affect the rest of the players in the game without having to worry about being affected by those players in turn.

The same goes for the mission runner who is injecting Isk and LP items into the economy.

It is not WHAT they are doing that anyone has a problem with - it is the hypocrisy of expecting that they have a right to affect the rest of us without being affected themselves that is the source of the ire.


Stop assuming hi sec dwellers are campaigning for complete and utter safety in all of eve. The only real issue is the problem of ganking, there is still the option for wardecs. And being in an NPC corp has its disadvantages too as it further reduces your interactions iwth others and limits the things you can do in eve, much like hi sec limits what people can do in eve.

Living in hi sec, you don't get sov, you don't get to PvP at a whim, you don't get to fly specific ships or use specific ships abilities.

There is a freak ton of other space, and a freak ton of people who like to PvP, its not going to kill eve one bit if ganking were removed or made a bit more difficult for players.

Unless everyone can agree that Ganking is the endgame of eve?
Barbara Nichole
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#125 - 2012-05-31 15:48:37 UTC
Drei Ontalas wrote:
1. In these forums there appears to be this notion that Hi-sec players should move (by force or encouragement) to lower-sec space. Why?

If a player is happy mining scordite in 1.0 space why is that a problem?
If a player like to sit in Jita making trades why is that a problem?
If a player prefers to do hi-sec missions what is the problem?

2. I am genuinely interested in establishing where/how the hostility towards hi-sec comes from. From my admittedly limitedly experience it seems so come down to the EVE equivalent of "Mommy he won't play with me! Make him!"

Am I completely off the mark?



boredom and being locked in to NAP's or associations they cannot break without real risk... also some few see opportunity in the chaos is makes.

  - remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not  "afk" cloaking -

[IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG]
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#126 - 2012-05-31 15:51:14 UTC
Spikeflach wrote:
There is a freak ton of other space, and a freak ton of people who like to PvP, its not going to kill eve one bit if ganking were removed or made a bit more difficult for players.

Unless everyone can agree that Ganking is the endgame of eve?


It's going to be nearly impossible to make ganking "harder" than it already is. There's already a really narrow window to even get a gank before CONCORD shows up which necessitates a very specific kind of ship, and your rewards are totally dependent on loot drops. Granted, I'm not trying to be all "woe gankers", just pointing out that there's not really much else you could change without wiping ganking off the map, since it's already on a knife edge as it is.

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["
Hortense Sledgemallet
Doomheim
#127 - 2012-05-31 15:54:36 UTC
It works both ways.
There are plenty of us that hate the one dimensional pinheads that only care about killboard stats.
teh ubernesstrader
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#128 - 2012-05-31 15:57:09 UTC
the hilarious thing is its not just high seccers targeted as such, its anyone with an industrial ship.

i myself live in null and fight and do industry, again posting on an alt is needed because people have far too much time on their hands and will hunt whoever down which again is interesting.

i flew 4 BC, 2 BS, 2 ity 5's and a hulk to a system on the edge of empire to get them jumped to null ........ any combat ship not a problem however my hulk (which i tanked because im not a complete fool) and both the ity 5's i run down to said location got targeted every other system from jita near enough ....... so dont go telling me your targeting high sec num nuts its anyone with an industrial ship in high sec because they have low tanking capabilities compared to a combat ship for obv reasons and they dont put up much of a fight.

i can understand you carry on about people not paying attention and being afk or if they was botters but its not like u watch them and make sure that is what they are you assume everyone who has anything to do with industry is any of the above.

its actually rather funny but hey you adapt and find another way to achieve your goal but dont go complaining when you have no new faces in eve to recruit other then spys or alts from someone who wants to make you fail.

most people new will start with mining because its easy, they can watch whats going on gain some isk be it a little and progress from there probobly going into missions and getting used to some form of combat then wanting to expand furthur.

what you also have to realise is that if they are getting ganked in high-sec they must be petrified to go to null because of the whole security thing explained throughout the tutorial if highsec is meant to be a "safer" place then null must be like putting a child in a bull ring and making him wear a red shirt.
Haulie Berry
#129 - 2012-05-31 15:58:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Haulie Berry
Spikeflach wrote:

Stop assuming hi sec dwellers are campaigning for complete and utter safety in all of eve. The only real issue is the problem of ganking, there is still the option for wardecs. And being in an NPC corp has its disadvantages too as it further reduces your interactions iwth others and limits the things you can do in eve, much like hi sec limits what people can do in eve.

Living in hi sec, you don't get sov, you don't get to PvP at a whim, you don't get to fly specific ships or use specific ships abilities.

There is a freak ton of other space, and a freak ton of people who like to PvP, its not going to kill eve one bit if ganking were removed or made a bit more difficult for players.

Unless everyone can agree that Ganking is the endgame of eve?


None of that is relevant, though. The mechanical price one pays for being in hisec isn't the issue. You are interfering with every other player in the game via the economy. They get to interfere with you in return. It doesn't matter how much other space there is - everything is connected by way of the economy.

Hisec ganking is, in fact, a demonstrably intended game mechanic. Were it not, it would simply be mechanically disallowed. Instead we have Concord - a system which intentionally allows it to happen while still ensuring that it comes with a price.

Ganking is neither a problem nor Eve's endgame - it's just another aspect of the game.
Jessica Sweetwater
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#130 - 2012-05-31 16:02:46 UTC
Drei Ontalas wrote:
1. In these forums there appears to be this notion that Hi-sec players should move (by force or encouragement) to lower-sec space. Why?

If a player is happy mining scordite in 1.0 space why is that a problem?
If a player like to sit in Jita making trades why is that a problem?
If a player prefers to do hi-sec missions what is the problem?

2. I am genuinely interested in establishing where/how the hostility towards hi-sec comes from. From my admittedly limitedly experience it seems so come down to the EVE equivalent of "Mommy he won't play with me! Make him!"

Am I completely off the mark?


Its been like this since 05

It is like u said

mommy he wont play how i want him to, make him play how i want

So they screw up high sec on purpose and force ccp to nerf high sec, tis fine, let them carry on

Doesnt bother us high sec dwellers, there just idiots
teh ubernesstrader
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#131 - 2012-05-31 16:03:01 UTC
i agree with haulie in a way ..... ganking is in eve and its there to be used all it means is people need to savvy up and change their gameplay.

dont grab the best output of ore instead you concentrate on survivability but i can bet id still get ganked by 8 destroyers if i was to mine in highsec even with a tank on my hulk lol
Drei Ontalas
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#132 - 2012-05-31 16:07:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Drei Ontalas
Haulie Berry wrote:

The problem isn't what they do in high security. The problem is the belief in a right to - and ceaseless campaigning for - the ability to be able to do that in absolute safety from engagement with the rest of the universe.

I will note, here, that the trader is actually an exception - that player is already participating in (and possibly thriving on) a form of PvP.

The miner mining scordite in a 1.0 system, though, is directly impacting the rest of the game. They are introducing new minerals to the market. This is okay, as long as the rest of the game can have an impact on the miner, as well - and it can. When the miner discovers that the rest of the game gets to affect him - often in a rather expensive fashion - the common impulse is to run to the forums and demand, in the abstract, that they should be able to affect the rest of the players in the game without having to worry about being affected by those players in turn.

The same goes for the mission runner who is injecting Isk and LP items into the economy.

It is not WHAT they are doing that anyone has a problem with - it is the hypocrisy of expecting that they have a right to affect the rest of us without being affected themselves that is the source of the ire.


This makes sense to me.
Skydell
Bad Girl Posse
#133 - 2012-05-31 16:10:04 UTC
Peter Raptor wrote:
Because gankers are scared to PVP with ships which have guns Big smile



For such a pro PvP group, they do seem to go out of their way to avoid it.
Khadann
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#134 - 2012-05-31 16:14:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Khadann
Tallian Saotome wrote:
Because this is a PVP game, and most of the current crop of highseccers think they should be safe.

This hate is new, it wasn't here until around Incarna(the expansion geared to pull in the wow type players who wouldn't play because they had no avatar), so I would expect it to pass.

Probably pass once those wow players who refuse to HTFU finally move back to themepark MMOs



I don't remember eve subscriptions increasing like hell since Incarna, or the community getting more kikoo lol since then.


What i see instead is an increase of agressiveness on the non-PVP community.

The few posts we see from supposed carebears complaining are signed by alts or trial characters, basically hidden trolls from the biggest PVP alliances.

Also, i must say that whenever a change is occuring in eve online, the firsts to whine are not the supposed youngest players in high-sec but the loudest pvp players, complaining that whatever bad change is affecting them is due somehow to the High sec players...

Not to mention the non acceptance of gameplays different from PVP & ganking (i don't include gangking in pvp, do you?)

Does not look like hate for me, but mostly like an early, growing xenophobia against high sec players...
A xenophobia the biggest alliances are pleased to spread so easilly through non indentified alts signed trolls...
Tallian Saotome
Nuclear Arms Exchange Inc.
#135 - 2012-05-31 16:24:39 UTC
Spikeflach wrote:

Living in hi sec, you don't get sov, you don't get to PvP at a whim, you don't get to fly specific ships or use specific ships abilities.

A) If you don't get to PvP at whim in highsec, then the ganks are not actually happening, so... yeah/

B) Given ganks happen, and wardecs happen, do you REALLY want people to bringing dreadnaughts and titans?

C) You don't quite seem to understand sov. Its actually meaningless nowadays beyond a name on the map. We fight for it simply for pride. Why do you think so many of the oldschool alliances like PL hold no sov anymore?

Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.
Tallian Saotome
Nuclear Arms Exchange Inc.
#136 - 2012-05-31 16:27:21 UTC
Khadann wrote:
Tallian Saotome wrote:
Because this is a PVP game, and most of the current crop of highseccers think they should be safe.

This hate is new, it wasn't here until around Incarna(the expansion geared to pull in the wow type players who wouldn't play because they had no avatar), so I would expect it to pass.

Probably pass once those wow players who refuse to HTFU finally move back to themepark MMOs



I don't remember eve subscriptions increasing like hell since Incarna, or the community getting more kikoo lol since then.


What i see instead is an increase of agressiveness on the non-PVP community.

The few posts we see from supposed carebears complaining are signed by alts or trial characters, basically hidden trolls from the biggest PVP alliances.

Also, i must say that whenever a change is occuring in eve online, the firsts to whine are not the supposed youngest players in high-sec but the loudest pvp players, complaining that whatever bad change is affecting them is due somehow to the High sec players...

Not to mention the non acceptance of gameplays different from PVP & ganking (i don't include gangking in pvp, do you?)

Does not look like hate for me, but mostly like an early, growing xenophobia against high sec players...
A xenophobia the biggest alliances are pleased to spread so easilly through non indentified alts signed trolls...

There was no sudden spike in subs, but there was a massive amount of unsubs from older players.

And I sure hope you don't mean the CFC dislikes newer players, because that would just be silly. CFC LOVES newer players, and most of us try to recruit them like mad. They do, however, have to live up to our standards ;)

Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.
Spikeflach
Perkone
Caldari State
#137 - 2012-05-31 16:28:53 UTC
Haulie Berry wrote:


None of that is relevant, though. The mechanical price one pays for being in hisec isn't the issue. You are interfering with every other player in the game via the economy. They get to interfere with you in return. It doesn't matter how much other space there is - everything is connected by way of the economy.

Hisec ganking is, in fact, a demonstrably intended game mechanic. Were it not, it would simply be mechanically disallowed. Instead we have Concord - a system which intentionally allows it to happen while still ensuring that it comes with a price.

Ganking is neither a problem nor Eve's endgame - it's just another aspect of the game.


I think all i said is completely relevant, just as relevant as you or anyone saying that ganking is a necessity and removing it will completely kill eve.

There are downsides to living in hi sec and doing everything in hi sec, you can't get the same things from hi sec as you can get in wormholes, lowsec, and 0.0. Venture out into wormholes, 0.0, or lowsec and you can experience even more eve has to offer.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#138 - 2012-05-31 16:32:27 UTC
Haulie Berry wrote:
Drei Ontalas wrote:
1. In these forums there appears to be this notion that Hi-sec players should move (by force or encouragement) to lower-sec space. Why?

If a player is happy mining scordite in 1.0 space why is that a problem?


It's not.

Quote:
If a player like to sit in Jita making trades why is that a problem?


It's not.

Quote:
If a player prefers to do hi-sec missions what is the problem?


There isn't one.

Quote:

2. I am genuinely interested in establishing where/how the hostility towards hi-sec comes from. From my admittedly limitedly experience it seems so come down to the EVE equivalent of "Mommy he won't play with me! Make him!"

Am I completely off the mark?


The problem isn't what they do in high security. The problem is the belief in a right to - and ceaseless campaigning for - the ability to be able to do that in absolute safety from engagement with the rest of the universe.

I will note, here, that the trader is actually an exception - that player is already participating in (and possibly thriving on) a form of PvP.

The miner mining scordite in a 1.0 system, though, is directly impacting the rest of the game. They are introducing new minerals to the market. This is okay, as long as the rest of the game can have an impact on the miner, as well - and it can. When the miner discovers that the rest of the game gets to affect him - often in a rather expensive fashion - the common impulse is to run to the forums and demand, in the abstract, that they should be able to affect the rest of the players in the game without having to worry about being affected by those players in turn.

The same goes for the mission runner who is injecting Isk and LP items into the economy.

It is not WHAT they are doing that anyone has a problem with - it is the hypocrisy of expecting that they have a right to affect the rest of us without being affected themselves that is the source of the ire.


This is the single most excellent explaination of the issue I've yet read. Well done.
Haulie Berry
#139 - 2012-05-31 16:35:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Haulie Berry
Spikeflach wrote:


I think all i said is completely relevant, just as relevant as you or anyone saying that ganking is a necessity and removing it will completely kill eve.

There are downsides to living in hi sec and doing everything in hi sec, you can't get the same things from hi sec as you can get in wormholes, lowsec, and 0.0. Venture out into wormholes, 0.0, or lowsec and you can experience even more eve has to offer.





So you feel that, because high sec "has downsides", high sec players should be able to interfere with every other player in the game (via their economic output) without having to fear any such interference in return?

Those are completely unrelated. High sec does have downsides, yes.

Regardless of those downsides, high-sec player activities still impact the rest of the universe - so in this context, how do those downsides matter at all? Unless the downsides were to be made so severe that a high sec dweller would be literally incapable of doing anything productive, it doesn't provide any balance to the equation.
Spikeflach
Perkone
Caldari State
#140 - 2012-05-31 16:35:47 UTC
Tallian Saotome wrote:

A) If you don't get to PvP at whim in highsec, then the ganks are not actually happening, so... yeah/

B) Given ganks happen, and wardecs happen, do you REALLY want people to bringing dreadnaughts and titans?

C) You don't quite seem to understand sov. Its actually meaningless nowadays beyond a name on the map. We fight for it simply for pride. Why do you think so many of the oldschool alliances like PL hold no sov anymore?



A) OKAY?

B) Uh, where did i say anything about dreadnaughts or titans?

C) I understand how sov works. It's meaningless only because the people make it that way. It isn't meaningless to other groups of people. Problem is the people who actually want to make use of the space that the large alliances have but don't ever use have to kiss up to every large alliance in game to live there.