These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Highsec "Carebear" representation from the CSM?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Frying Doom
#161 - 2012-12-11 01:49:25 UTC
Imports Plus wrote:
Still waiting for someone to articulate the issues currently facing highsec today.... lets hear it boys

You mean besides the


  • Current problems faced by mission runners
  • The destruction on the Hi-sec markets the CSMs current plan to fix Null sec would achieve
  • The possibility that CCP is looking to nerf hi-sec by 10% to make the rest of the game seem more appealing
  • The very fact that in the current CSM structure a Hi-sec member is required to tow the line or be mocked. Giving Hi-sec no voice.
  • The lack of ease to expand markets into Null sec without being a member of those Alliances
  • Poor Market interface for traders
  • The ease of access of -10 pirates into a supposedly policed area.


Those are just off the top of my head and I am not primarily a Hi-sec player, so am sure that dedicated hi-sec players could give you a lot better reasons.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Ginger Barbarella
#162 - 2012-12-11 01:57:11 UTC
Imports Plus wrote:
Still waiting for someone to articulate the issues currently facing highsec today.... lets hear it boys


From the perspective of those too chicken for low/null pew, we have it too easy with our big ol' mining ships and uber-buffs to them.

From the persective of the high sec carebears, it's to easy for the elite peeveepee'ers to kill innocent miners with no consequences whatsoever (CONCORD is NOT a consequence of--- well-- consequence)

From the perspective of high sec missioners, it takes too long to blitz those missions, and it's totally unfair that L5's are only in the no-man's land of low sec.

From the perspective of those of us that don't give a flyin' crap about those above, there really ain't a problem.

Make you a deal: you don't tell me how to play, and I won't tell you how to play. Deal?

"Blow it all on Quafe and strippers." --- Sorlac
Himnos Altar
An Errant Venture
#163 - 2012-12-11 02:30:09 UTC
Titas Agor wrote:
I think the issue lays with how everyone see's EVE has the hardcore MMO, the harshest MMO out there, and the real enjoyment comes from PVP, going out to nullsec, joining alliances, getting your ass handed to you 2 or 3 systems in nullsec or vise versa, whoever has the biggest blob... and untill this line of thinking changes, PVE will always been limted in this game, having a CSM thats focuses on PVE and high sec stuff wont change this if the majority of eve players just simply dont want it...

There are plenty, PLENTY of ways to make high sec PVE a lot less suckage, but its difficult to convince people if no one actually wants it, and just cares about the pew pew side of things rather then having actual real PVE gameplay that adds a lot of diversity to high sec PVE.. For example, instead of having wormholes acting like pockets of 0.0 space, having gone through all the toruble of scanning a WH down, making it so when you jump through, its actually you of your fleets own personal instance, with a time on it to do whatever you want in the time allowed in the new crimewatch timer display, which would be to mine, rat npcs, doing the sleeper complex's, whatever you want, and if your still inside the WH when the timer runs out, it collapse on all of you, so you all die and pod killed, like a black hole if you will, so there is plenty of risk vs reward, and obviously the more you have in the fleet, the more assets you'd be able to bring back with you, but the PVP players would be in an absolute uproar about this because they wouldn't be able to shoot ppl in them anymore... you wouldn't be able to milk the resources in the WH forever with a POS.. but that is just one example of how you could make more PVE meaningfull to players that actually dont like PvP or venture out to low sec or 0.0..



As a current Wormholer, here is my opinion of that:

NO!

Instances? In EVE? Bad idea. the whole selling point of EVE is that you're in one universe. One shard. Anyone can find anyone anywhere if they know where the other person is (and get past the camps/find the right hole, etc).

If you want to make POS living more untenable, have Sleepers randomly siege POSes, in EVERY class. It would weed out the offline POSes...
Kaylyis
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#164 - 2012-12-11 03:06:59 UTC
I want to be on the CSM representing highsec interest by encouraging CCP to buff the everliving **** out of opportunities for meaningful gains on an individual, corporate and alliance level.

specifically, in low and nullsec.

IE let's make the rewards for success there commiserate with the risk you take when you sneak into space where Goons and TEST and the Russians, and Pandemic Legion lurk. something worth the effort of going there and killing them or sneaking through their stuff to take your piece of null.

and stacks of beer to be issued to all capsuleers, so we can have drunk driving in space, and space-lane collisions and friendly fire incidents we can all LOL at.

it will be mislabeled as various popular combat boosters.

also concord shutdown for ninety minutes once per year for periodic system maintenance. Even though I doubt CCP will ever do it.
Darek Castigatus
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#165 - 2012-12-11 03:27:53 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:

I too would run, except for a few reasons:

1. It is clear that anyone who stridently opposes the null sec agenda and speaks for high sec play is labelled a loon, disruptive, and tossed off the CSM for "NDA violations".
2. As it has been stated many, many times, high sec players are far too disorganised to put proper high sec representation on the CSM. Kelduum had a 2000 char voting bloc called Eve UNI at his disposal, and Issler has name recognition. Anyone else that tried to run would get lost in the noise.
3. I fully expect to be muzzled soon by the ISD, permanently. People like me who fight against the injustices of the null sec regime disappear from the game, or at least the forums.
4. I really don't know how much longer I can stand this crap. This is supposed to be a game, something for me to enjoy. That enjoyment is fast eroding to nothingness, replaced by total anger, frustration, and despair. There you go null sec zealots, you have almost pushed me from the game. You almost have achieved another victory.

To be perfectly blunt, even one true "high sec zealot" (If I can call the current regime null sec zealots, I think it is only fair I be labelled a high sec zealot) is not enough to do anything. You need a minimum of 2, possibly 3 in the first 7 to avoid being ignored and drummed right out of the CSM. Being an alternate is not good enough.

That would mean basically getting 12,000 high sec chars all co-ordinated enough to strategically vote split 3 ways to ensure representation. And even if by some miracle you could get that organised, you would see such a coming together of the null sec vote like never before. The null sec regime, would be utterly terrified of 3 out of 7 CSM members being high sec, and would ensure a massive voter participation by null sec.

No, the vast vast majority of high sec players vote with their wallet instead.
Mark my words, this latest victory by the null sec zealots is not the last.
They have their sights set on high sec industry next.
Death by a thousand cuts is what we are witnessing.


Ok then, lets address these so called points of yours shall we.

1. Ankh got herself thrown off the CSM purely through her own issues, didnt need a big null based conspiracy when she was constantly causing trouble and blatantly breached the rules.

2. This is probably the only reasonable point you have in this list but guess what, if no one ever bothers to try then nothing will ever change about this. You go on and on about how highsec is under represented and needs people who will actively advocate for its issues yet all you can produce is a list of excuses why it shouldnt be you. If you put in half the effort on campaigning that you do bitching about null sec zealotry then i dont see how you could fail.

3. You have the same avenues of complaint about that issue as anyone else on this forum, drop the damn persecution complex already.

4. Perhaps if you actually tried discussing issues instead of ranting like a street corner doomsayer every time someone you dont like dares to mention highsec perhaps you would enjoy it more

Pirates - The Invisible Fist of Darwin

you're welcome
Frying Doom
#166 - 2012-12-11 04:17:12 UTC
Darek Castigatus wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:

I too would run, except for a few reasons:

1. It is clear that anyone who stridently opposes the null sec agenda and speaks for high sec play is labelled a loon, disruptive, and tossed off the CSM for "NDA violations".
2. As it has been stated many, many times, high sec players are far too disorganised to put proper high sec representation on the CSM. Kelduum had a 2000 char voting bloc called Eve UNI at his disposal, and Issler has name recognition. Anyone else that tried to run would get lost in the noise.
3. I fully expect to be muzzled soon by the ISD, permanently. People like me who fight against the injustices of the null sec regime disappear from the game, or at least the forums.
4. I really don't know how much longer I can stand this crap. This is supposed to be a game, something for me to enjoy. That enjoyment is fast eroding to nothingness, replaced by total anger, frustration, and despair. There you go null sec zealots, you have almost pushed me from the game. You almost have achieved another victory.

To be perfectly blunt, even one true "high sec zealot" (If I can call the current regime null sec zealots, I think it is only fair I be labelled a high sec zealot) is not enough to do anything. You need a minimum of 2, possibly 3 in the first 7 to avoid being ignored and drummed right out of the CSM. Being an alternate is not good enough.

That would mean basically getting 12,000 high sec chars all co-ordinated enough to strategically vote split 3 ways to ensure representation. And even if by some miracle you could get that organised, you would see such a coming together of the null sec vote like never before. The null sec regime, would be utterly terrified of 3 out of 7 CSM members being high sec, and would ensure a massive voter participation by null sec.

No, the vast vast majority of high sec players vote with their wallet instead.
Mark my words, this latest victory by the null sec zealots is not the last.
They have their sights set on high sec industry next.
Death by a thousand cuts is what we are witnessing.


Ok then, lets address these so called points of yours shall we.

1. Ankh got herself thrown off the CSM purely through her own issues, didnt need a big null based conspiracy when she was constantly causing trouble and blatantly breached the rules.

2. This is probably the only reasonable point you have in this list but guess what, if no one ever bothers to try then nothing will ever change about this. You go on and on about how highsec is under represented and needs people who will actively advocate for its issues yet all you can produce is a list of excuses why it shouldnt be you. If you put in half the effort on campaigning that you do bitching about null sec zealotry then i dont see how you could fail.

3. You have the same avenues of complaint about that issue as anyone else on this forum, drop the damn persecution complex already.

4. Perhaps if you actually tried discussing issues instead of ranting like a street corner doomsayer every time someone you dont like dares to mention highsec perhaps you would enjoy it more

Given the standard null sec patterns for preventing discussions they don't want to have

  • Spamming threads
  • Repeating the same drivel time and time again
  • Refusing to accept hard numbers but considering there own made up numbers as facts
  • pretending not to notice when you answer there questions for a specific reference or statistic
  • Going on for pages over a spelling error such as lose and loose
  • Using multiple people who come on at specific times in an effort to wear down anyone who is bringing up something they do not like
  • Deliberately filling threads with nothing in an effort to have it closed for no content
  • War decing people who disagree with them
  • And now bounties for those who disagree with them


Yes I can understand why people don't want to have a discussion with some Null sec groups. There are a lot of why bother points and yes if you are a single person you will eventually make a mistake that the committee you are arguing with will use against you.

But so what it is a game, If you want to go through that you can make a hell of a noise.Evil

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Amarra Mandalin
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#167 - 2012-12-11 05:14:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Amarra Mandalin
Imports Plus wrote:
Still waiting for someone to articulate the issues currently facing highsec today.... lets hear it boys


If its members could have a war/retribution of consequence (probably involving mercs) with James 315 and friends, (and other griefers) would be my guess. PvE content might be worth considering, too. Just sayin'
SaKoil
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#168 - 2012-12-11 06:01:39 UTC
Galaxy Pig wrote:
I nominate James 315. Who better to represent the carebears than the Savior of Highsec?


This. The current CSM has had at least 2 highly ineffective carebears in form of Kelduum and Issler, both of which are nowadays scorned by their peers and voters.

If James 315 accepts his natural role as the official highsec CSM rep I am sure we will see numerous positive changes in the area. James has a proven track record of pinpointing the true promlems of highsec and highly celebrated vision of how to make highsec a better place for everyone.
Eight Two
SWIFT Inc.
#169 - 2012-12-11 06:05:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Eight Two
Interesting stats there.~ 35% of characters live in null/low or wh space. Yet 75% like PvP. Speaks volumes... or doesn't it?

Questions to raise are:

How is this data gathered? Especially the habitation data, what is it based on? There's plenty of toons that live in all sorts of space at various times.

How many accounts participated?

How many of those were alt-accounts? What's the toon:person ratio? (Most important part)

A ten year old with basic understanding of maths and statistics would be able to grasp that what is presented there in an admittedly entertaining fashion is highly unrepresentative of the true status quo in game.

On a more serious note, it's getting tedious to listen to the wannabe elitist nullsec crowd with their hardcore perception of a videogame throwing the same, excuse my frank bullsh*t arguments around year after year after year.

The truth is, a lot of people can't be arsed to put up with CTAs, mandatory attendance, drunk idiots and/or people hit by all sorts of pre- and post-puperty disorders on comms on a regular basis.

The truth is also that a lot of people use Eve just as any other MMO: immerse themselves for a couple of hours a week for entertainment and entertainment only, not to feed their own egos over something happening in a virtual ( adj temporarily simulated or extended by computer software) world.

The more the elitst crowd cries for elitist content, the less this game can and will actually grow. A lot of recent changes over the past years have affected PvE and look at the very pesentation of statistics certain people seem so vocal about. There is an increase in activity. As in any game that combines PvP and PvE aspects it's not about the crowd that cries the loudest, it's about how many people actually play the game.

That is the only thing that keeps the servers online at the end of the day. People vote with their feet and only with their feet when it comes to spare time activities.

Only one thing can be a fix and one thing only to the real issues in the eve universe and that is content balancing based on effort/risk/reward. That includes fixing nullsec and lowsec mechanics and adding content through all accesible space including WH. Yes, that also means more Theme Park.

A sandbox is only as good or bad as the tools that come along with it. At the end of the day it's CCP's job, they are the only ones to provide us with the tool to make the sandbox worthwile.
One last time, it's not about shoving your own opinion on how the game is supposed to be played down each and everybody's throat that happens to come along, nor do I give half a rat's a*s about certain people trying to feed their own ego by acting all tough and elitist on a forum on the internet.

Thus, a highsec only representative is not really needed for the CSM, its much more up to CCP to take a long, hard look at who they actually let come into a position to represent the community. Until then, the CSM will continue to be the joke it is and always has been.

TL;DR Use your brain for once.
Frying Doom
#170 - 2012-12-11 06:08:04 UTC
SaKoil wrote:
Galaxy Pig wrote:
I nominate James 315. Who better to represent the carebears than the Savior of Highsec?


This. The current CSM has had at least 2 highly ineffective carebears in form of Kelduum and Issler, both of which are nowadays scorned by their peers and voters.

If James 315 accepts his natural role as the official highsec CSM rep I am sure we will see numerous positive changes in the area. James has a proven track record of pinpointing the true promlems of highsec and highly celebrated vision of how to make highsec a better place for everyone.

And yet Mining as a profession has had more love this year than ever before.

they are more scorned by there peers as they are from Hi-sec.

as for James 315 he is just the head of The Hi-sec Cowards Association.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Amarra Mandalin
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#171 - 2012-12-11 06:17:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Amarra Mandalin
I think people fail to understand as well that it is a rare person who has both an Indy/PvE and PvP mentality. It doesn't mean they are stupid or uncommitted, though some are and some do play the game less. But generalizations help nothing. Indy is Chinese to most PvPers as well.

I happen to love PvP and like PvE /Indy but even playing *full-time* could not do both well. Indy took too much time.

I realize there are exceptional people who can, who really take a vested interested in Indy and bring out a shiny to fight.

If anything though, a highsec CSM might help Empire dwellers best by not only looking after the things they want, but the things they need ...and may not especially want, at first. That is, improvements that make living in a PvP game viable -- or fun even. Like a game mechanic that prevents people from equipping anti-capital guns on a high-sec POS. *cough* Ok maybe some POS owners should read more, but the general point is valid -- people may not know what they need to know.

Also, the better life is for "carebears" the more ships PvPers have to gank/kill which = win-win as long as it is not so discouraging it causes them to quit.
Mr Pragmatic
#172 - 2012-12-11 06:21:20 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
SaKoil wrote:
Galaxy Pig wrote:
I nominate James 315. Who better to represent the carebears than the Savior of Highsec?


This. The current CSM has had at least 2 highly ineffective carebears in form of Kelduum and Issler, both of which are nowadays scorned by their peers and voters.

If James 315 accepts his natural role as the official highsec CSM rep I am sure we will see numerous positive changes in the area. James has a proven track record of pinpointing the true promlems of highsec and highly celebrated vision of how to make highsec a better place for everyone.

And yet Mining as a profession has had more love this year than ever before.

they are more scorned by there peers as they are from Hi-sec.

as for James 315 he is just the head of The Hi-sec Cowards Association.




Hmmmm, If I was a bounty hunter with dedication I think I would hunt down everyone of these "People".

Super cali hella yolo swaga dopeness.  -Yoloswaggins, in the fellowship of the bling.
Amarra Mandalin
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#173 - 2012-12-11 06:22:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Amarra Mandalin
Mr Pragmatic wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
SaKoil wrote:
Galaxy Pig wrote:
I nominate James 315. Who better to represent the carebears than the Savior of Highsec?


This. The current CSM has had at least 2 highly ineffective carebears in form of Kelduum and Issler, both of which are nowadays scorned by their peers and voters.

If James 315 accepts his natural role as the official highsec CSM rep I am sure we will see numerous positive changes in the area. James has a proven track record of pinpointing the true promlems of highsec and highly celebrated vision of how to make highsec a better place for everyone.

And yet Mining as a profession has had more love this year than ever before.

they are more scorned by there peers as they are from Hi-sec.

as for James 315 he is just the head of The Hi-sec Cowards Association.




Hmmmm, If I was a bounty hunter with dedication I think I would hunt down everyone of these "People".



Do you know how much return there is on a Catalyst? ;) Also, there is sec status to be considered unless you buy the killright. Not to mention having the warp-in point or some way to kill pirates who know effective game/aggression mechanics. The bounty system is a joke, in my opinion. It (mostly) lowers the cost to make it profitable to gank a shiney. The joke is on high-sec.
Lin Suizei
#174 - 2012-12-11 06:50:52 UTC
Amarra Mandalin wrote:
Do you know how much return there is on a Catalyst? ;) Also, there is sec status to be considered unless you buy the killright. Not to mention having the warp-in point or some way to kill pirates who know effective game/aggression mechanics. The bounty system is a joke, in my opinion. It (mostly) lowers the cost to make it profitable to gank a shiney. The joke is on high-sec.


tl;dr: I don't want to face the consequences of fighting back: sacrificing my ISK, losing my security status, having to work together with others to provide warp-ins. Please change the mechanics so I can fight the New Order free of these consequences, by myself, because they are ~griefers~.

Lol I can't delete my forum sig.
Frying Doom
#175 - 2012-12-11 06:55:47 UTC
Amarra Mandalin wrote:
Mr Pragmatic wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
SaKoil wrote:
Galaxy Pig wrote:
I nominate James 315. Who better to represent the carebears than the Savior of Highsec?


This. The current CSM has had at least 2 highly ineffective carebears in form of Kelduum and Issler, both of which are nowadays scorned by their peers and voters.

If James 315 accepts his natural role as the official highsec CSM rep I am sure we will see numerous positive changes in the area. James has a proven track record of pinpointing the true promlems of highsec and highly celebrated vision of how to make highsec a better place for everyone.

And yet Mining as a profession has had more love this year than ever before.

they are more scorned by there peers as they are from Hi-sec.

as for James 315 he is just the head of The Hi-sec Cowards Association.




Hmmmm, If I was a bounty hunter with dedication I think I would hunt down everyone of these "People".



Do you know how much return there is on a Catalyst? ;) Also, there is sec status to be considered unless you buy the killright. Not to mention having the warp-in point or some way to kill pirates who know effective game/aggression mechanics. The bounty system is a joke, in my opinion. It (mostly) lowers the cost to make it profitable to gank a shiney. The joke is on high-sec.

Maybe they need to change the way bounty payouts work completely.

For example any kill of ship or pod gives you 1/100th of the bounty, for each bounty.
Not payable to Alts, corp or alliance members or characters yourself, corp or alliance has set to blue.

so for example I put a 50 million bounty on you, someone kills you giving then 500k and 99kills left on that bounty.

then someone else chucks a 10 billion bounty on you.
The next time you are killed your first bounty drops another 500k, and the new bounty drops 100million and drops to 99 deaths left. While the ganker gets 100,500,000 isk for your death ect.. ect..

This would require a max number of bounties on a character so I would say 500(I am sure the database guys could give a better figure depending on current load) and increase the minimum bounty amount to prevent filling the slots with spam minimum amounts.

This way it would be worth killing players and it is hard to profit by for the person with the bounty. They can profit using a 3rd party but only 1/100th of the amount per kill, so would take a while to be worth the hassle while making bounties into an entire profession in EvE.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Amarra Mandalin
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#176 - 2012-12-11 06:56:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Amarra Mandalin
Lin Suizei wrote:
Amarra Mandalin wrote:
Do you know how much return there is on a Catalyst? ;) Also, there is sec status to be considered unless you buy the killright. Not to mention having the warp-in point or some way to kill pirates who know effective game/aggression mechanics. The bounty system is a joke, in my opinion. It (mostly) lowers the cost to make it profitable to gank a shiney. The joke is on high-sec.


tl;dr: I don't want to face the consequences of fighting back: sacrificing my ISK, losing my security status, having to work together with others to provide warp-ins. Please change the mechanics so I can fight the New Order free of these consequences, by myself, because they are ~griefers~.


tl;dr Try reading comprehension. As I mentioned in the post above, people might benefit from a war of consequence, which would involve both isk and time. Last I read, James 315 was war decced to the tune of 50m and went to Dec Shield.

Carebears don't need to turn into PvPers themselves just to make you happy (Though they should learn defense or hire mercs if needed). Also, your tactics are hard enough to fight and not very profitable to do so.

I personally don't care much about griefing -- I have engaged in all sorts of PvP (and oooh I was -10 for some time, so respect my sacrifice Eve for ganking ships and having fun-- I don't think so) and have my own preferences-- but I see why many would have issue with it.

And basically, the only reason it was mentioned is as an *example* of the issues high-sec faces, in light of needing a CSM. Don't take it so personal. Bears have to do their part too, but that's been well-established. Might be time for your side to own up a little more -- what's worse in this game, easy isk or easy kills? If the answer is other than "neither" it is hypocritical.

P.S. I probably would vote for James as CSM -- he seems articulate enough and understands the game from what I see. I can't say where his loyalties would lie though.
Sister Lumi
Doomheim
#177 - 2012-12-11 07:43:49 UTC
Titas Agor wrote:
For example, instead of having wormholes acting like pockets of 0.0 space, having gone through all the toruble of scanning a WH down, making it so when you jump through, its actually you of your fleets own personal instance, with a time on it to do whatever you want in the time allowed in the new crimewatch timer display, which would be to mine, rat npcs, doing the sleeper complex's, whatever you want, and if your still inside the WH when the timer runs out, it collapse on all of you, so you all die and pod killed, like a black hole if you will, so there is plenty of risk vs reward, and obviously the more you have in the fleet, the more assets you'd be able to bring back with you, but the PVP players would be in an absolute uproar about this because they wouldn't be able to shoot ppl in them anymore... you wouldn't be able to milk the resources in the WH forever with a POS.. but that is just one example of how you could make more PVE meaningfull to players that actually dont like PvP or venture out to low sec or 0.0..


So you have a clearly visible, ticking timer on your screen

Only source of risk would then be your slavery to greed

This is why you hiseccers make normal people feel like throwing up
AndromacheDarkstar
Integrated Insterstellar Holdings
#178 - 2012-12-11 07:52:25 UTC
Harland White wrote:
The CSM is composed 100% of nullsec zealots, griefers and pirates. Any/all ideas proposed by CSM generally are anti-highsec. Highseccers are kinda ****ed.

But it's not a problem to me. If I'm eventually forced to a different style of gameplay in order to earn my PLEX/isk each month, there's a nice big juicy "unsubscribe" button waiting for me. And I'll keep my stuff in case CCP has a change of heart about their current goals regarding nerfing highsec.


And to be honest who really gives a **** if you choose to unsubscribe. You have admited your not paying to play the game, they are not nerfing hi sec they are bringing it in line with the amount of risk you take being there. As it stands the isk you can make from hi sec incursions/hi sec mining and level 4 missions is still far to high.

For the game to function as it should with people interacting with eachother on a daily basis (it is an MMO remember) you have to force people into more dangerous situations. That way they start working together and forming corps, you start making friends and enemies and all of a sudden the game opens up.

If you are playing this game single player you are playing it wrong, thats not an opinion thats pure fact. I live for the moment that isk making and industry are driven out of hi sec into low and null or they drop the high sec system size to a fraction of its current incarnation.
AndromacheDarkstar
Integrated Insterstellar Holdings
#179 - 2012-12-11 07:59:51 UTC
LHA Tarawa wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
As for the main question of the thread. We've been over this over and over again. if high sec people can't be bothered to click a freaking button once a year (or every 6 months or whatever), they don't deserve "representation". if they can't bother to organize politically, that's their problem, not the game's the community's or CCPs.



As a high sec carebear myself, I think the issue is that we tend to be more casual in our play style. I want to log in, run a few missions or mine some rocks, then log out.

I do not want to sit around for hours waiting for a pvp fleet to form up, then spend hours roaming around not finding targets. I do not want to sit on the titan waiting to see if we have the numbers to fight. I do not want to go on a POS bash to take down a cyno jammer, so we can take over a system, so big bosses can mine moons that I won't see any of the ISK from, other than paying the sov bill for my upgrade anoms, that I can only run when there are no non-blue in system...

As a result of this more causal play style, I can't be bothered to run for CSM, nor bothered to even read about who is running, and I'm sure as heck not going to be able to be told for whom to vote for by my alliance leadership... that doesn't even exist.




You dont have to do those things, you dont have ot wait around for ages, You can join a small gang corp and go out solo in low sec, you could even mine in low sec if CCP made it worthwhile. Even if you only have a couple of hours to play each night actually having some risk and interaction whilst playing the game would make it so much more interesting.

Maybe im barking up the wrong tree, maybe i should go and make a space game purely about mining, make it completely single player and utterly utterly boring, it only needs to be one station, a copuple of sparse belts and a few rocks. Could probably knock it up in a couple of minutes and be rich by the end of the day.
Imports Plus
Doomheim
#180 - 2012-12-11 08:04:08 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Imports Plus wrote:
Still waiting for someone to articulate the issues currently facing highsec today.... lets hear it boys

You mean besides the


  • Current problems faced by mission runners
  • The destruction on the Hi-sec markets the CSMs current plan to fix Null sec would achieve
  • The possibility that CCP is looking to nerf hi-sec by 10% to make the rest of the game seem more appealing
  • The very fact that in the current CSM structure a Hi-sec member is required to tow the line or be mocked. Giving Hi-sec no voice.
  • The lack of ease to expand markets into Null sec without being a member of those Alliances
  • Poor Market interface for traders
  • The ease of access of -10 pirates into a supposedly policed area.


Those are just off the top of my head and I am not primarily a Hi-sec player, so am sure that dedicated hi-sec players could give you a lot better reasons.


So go back to the neanderthal NPC AI in missions to the delight of drones everywhere, dont do anything about manufacturing or mining in null because Jita might burp, vague murmurings about nerfing highsec, CSM structure in itself is anti-highsec, let highsec dudes sell in 0.0 risk-free because all goods in 0.0 arent bought in highsec to begin with, do something with the market UI and dont let -10 dudes in highsec even in a pod?

Why havent Kelduum and Issler been all over this, these issues are pretty reasonable What?