These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

QotD: How do you measure profitability of highsec ganking?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#81 - 2014-10-01 22:59:23 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:

And again, ask the gankers themselves, they will freely admit that a lot of what they are doing is enjoying TEARS.


They are a delightful side effect to something I would be doing anyway. Apparently this means I should be banned according to your armchair internet psychology.

Brilliant deduction, but lets see what the verdict says? Oh, nope. Turns out I've been doing this for the last five years solid across six different EVE accounts and I haven't been banned yet.

Oh, I am still waiting for you to try and reconcile your "I am looking at actions" on the fact that carebears are responsible for vastly more abusive language than any other demographic in EVE Online. Since their intent is not relevant, surely you would have no problem with them being perma banned for so flagrantly violating the EULA so often?

I fully expect you to dodge that last question, by the way.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#82 - 2014-10-01 23:02:14 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
Veers Belvar wrote:
Just quickly, because as per usual you completely missed the point.


Your point was that you don't believe you can judge intent. Then you made a whole post about how you don't like the intent you believe is behind certain actions.

Quote:
That's why I focus on actions.


So explain how inviting someone to perform a singing ransom is different from inviting someone to perform a singing ransom. I'm giving you actions to focus on here, then once you explain the difference between the two situations, and pick which one you think is OK (since you claim that at least one is), I'll tell you which one the ransomee gets violently angry in.

Quote:
And if you invite someone to voice coms (even if you initially you claim to have had noble intentions) and then spend the next hour goading them into more and more anger


You get banned.

Quote:
And if you gank someone and then plaster local with mocking chat, and get the person angrier and angrier while exalting in the scene


You also get banned if you cross the line into harassment. Though your definition of "harassment" seems to be quite literally any words by a ganker, so... probably not.


But neither of those are prevalent in my experience. What does happen, in my experience, is that some portion of the people you kill in EVE will fly off the handle. The ones who do this tend to do so immediately and without any prompting.

But, of course, you've repeatedly said that you don't mind the EULA violating content of that kind of posting because the ebil gankers "like it"


Is there a reason why you keep alluding to examples where the person who you think was crossing the line got banned? Because that would seem like an evidence for "everything is working now," rather than supporting your arguments.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
CALDARI CITIZEN 14330909
The Conference Elite
The Conference
#83 - 2014-10-01 23:06:25 UTC
Charax Bouclier wrote:
Income - Cost = Profitability

I think the "cost" and "income" is open to interpretation. I'll offer up a few concepts and you're free to agree or disagree with them, and replace them with your own.

Cost

1. The value of your ship that gets CONCORDed
2. Opportunity Cost of doing alternate ISK-making activities

Income

1. What you can salvage from the wreck
2. Intrinsic pleasure of augmenting your kill statistics
3. Hearty chuckles from rage mails/whispers/local
4. EVE-O forum threads/posts about you and your corp's disreputable behavior

Certainly, some variables will be valued differently by each person. How would you algebraically weight the above variables (including variables that you come up with, if applicable) to compute whether a highsec gank was truly profitable?



Fun and entertainment.

The Artist Formerly Known As AC. 

The terminal end of the digestive system. 

The Best CSM Candidate
Glathull
Warlock Assassins
#84 - 2014-10-02 01:52:29 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
La Rynx wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
It's the subsequent baiting...the goading in local, the attempt to get people on TS and rile them up...and then to capture an emotional breakdown and get twisted amusement from it. Gank all you want, just stop looking for "tears." Focus on the game, and accomplish things in it...don't use it as a mechanism to inflict emotional distress.


...Because what you describe is harassment and a good way to get banned, so gankers don't do it...

What he describes is, what a lot of code-guys do.
loyalanon is one of them and some more, proven by their own page the mb.com.
So "gankers don't do it" feels very wrong for me.
Do you differ codies from regular gankers?
Or should the pretense of "roleplaying" excuse such behavior?
In my oppinion it does not excuse this behaviour, in my oppionion it shows a lack of respect for the other players.
To those guys i would recommend to play "the Sims 4" and then come back to play EvE.


You remind me of a girl I used to date a long time ago. Once, she asked me to spell orange, so I said, "O-R-A-N-G-E".

And she looks at me with a scowl and says, "No, I mean the colour, not the fruit."


I can't stop laughing at your ex. My god!! I think we might have dated the same woman. :(

I honestly feel like I just read fifty shades of dumb. --CCP Falcon
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#85 - 2014-10-02 02:05:33 UTC
Glathull wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
La Rynx wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
It's the subsequent baiting...the goading in local, the attempt to get people on TS and rile them up...and then to capture an emotional breakdown and get twisted amusement from it. Gank all you want, just stop looking for "tears." Focus on the game, and accomplish things in it...don't use it as a mechanism to inflict emotional distress.


...Because what you describe is harassment and a good way to get banned, so gankers don't do it...

What he describes is, what a lot of code-guys do.
loyalanon is one of them and some more, proven by their own page the mb.com.
So "gankers don't do it" feels very wrong for me.
Do you differ codies from regular gankers?
Or should the pretense of "roleplaying" excuse such behavior?
In my oppinion it does not excuse this behaviour, in my oppionion it shows a lack of respect for the other players.
To those guys i would recommend to play "the Sims 4" and then come back to play EvE.


You remind me of a girl I used to date a long time ago. Once, she asked me to spell orange, so I said, "O-R-A-N-G-E".

And she looks at me with a scowl and says, "No, I mean the colour, not the fruit."


I can't stop laughing at your ex. My god!! I think we might have dated the same woman. :(


Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if she was seeing other dudes tbh. She was a bit like a fart that way.

I always had to pretend she wasn't mine when in public.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#86 - 2014-10-02 02:51:44 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:

Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if she was seeing other dudes tbh. She was a bit like a fart that way.

I always had to pretend she wasn't mine when in public.


Been there with purple hair.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
ashley Eoner
#87 - 2014-10-02 04:48:40 UTC  |  Edited by: ashley Eoner
Charax Bouclier wrote:
Income - Cost = Profitability

I think the "cost" and "income" is open to interpretation. I'll offer up a few concepts and you're free to agree or disagree with them, and replace them with your own.

Cost

1. The value of your ship that gets CONCORDed
2. Opportunity Cost of doing alternate ISK-making activities

Income

1. What you can salvage from the wreck
2. Intrinsic pleasure of augmenting your kill statistics
3. Hearty chuckles from rage mails/whispers/local
4. EVE-O forum threads/posts about you and your corp's disreputable behavior

Certainly, some variables will be valued differently by each person. How would you algebraically weight the above variables (including variables that you come up with, if applicable) to compute whether a highsec gank was truly profitable?

I have no idea why you're including 2. in costs.

If you measured everything that way then nothing would be profitable because the single most profitable activity in the game is to sell a plex which can take all of a couple seconds to do. If you put that in the costs side you've just broke everything. Excluding plex sales everything pales in comparison to market gaming. etc etc

I measure profitability differently depending on the target. Sometimes just killing the target is all the profit I want.
La Rynx
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#88 - 2014-10-02 08:53:01 UTC  |  Edited by: La Rynx
RubyPorto wrote:

Veers is claiming a number of things that he (characteristically) is unwilling to provide evidence for:
1) Gankers gank for no legitimate in-game purpose
2) Gankers harass their targets to produce tears
3) Gankers are bad people for doing their in-game activity
4) Verbal abuse isn't really agaist the rules if you're really mad because of someone's legitimate in-game activity
and several others.


So Veers is on a mission like this j315 guy.

1) I do not have a problem with ganking, since it keeps highsec interesting.

Point 2) however is some problem, where some sad entities want to elicit rage.

3) This is to general, some Point 2) entities lack social competences. Ganking alone is not evil.

Point 4) Another Problem case: Those Point 2) entities try to elicit rage and provoke Verbal abuse. That might not excuse every outbreak, but it excuses quite a lot. If one needs others despair and anger so badly, they should play "the Sims4". Everywhere else, halve a Brain and human decency should forbid to much rage-fishing. This way its just another try to kick other people from the game.
I see a difference in legit game mechanics and human behaviour. It is legit to gank ships, but there is no reason to hoss around and humiliate the victim further. Again, i do not see that in a standard ganker, but quiet often from codies.

Play EvE and not "as?hole"!

Atomic Virulent : "You can't spell DOUCHE. without CODE."
Solecist Project
#89 - 2014-10-02 09:26:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Solecist Project
La Rynx wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:

Veers is claiming a number of things that he (characteristically) is unwilling to provide evidence for:
1) Gankers gank for no legitimate in-game purpose
2) Gankers harass their targets to produce tears
3) Gankers are bad people for doing their in-game activity
4) Verbal abuse isn't really agaist the rules if you're really mad because of someone's legitimate in-game activity
and several others.


So Veers is on a mission like this j315 guy.

1) I do not have a problem with ganking, since it keeps highsec interesting.

Point 2) however is some problem, where some sad entities want to elicit rage.

3) This is to general, some Point 2) entities lack social competences. Ganking alone is not evil.

Point 4) Another Problem case: Those Point 2) entities try to elicit rage and provoke Verbal abuse. That might not excuse every outbreak, but it excuses quite a lot. If one needs others despair and anger so badly, they should play "the Sims4". Everywhere else, halve a Brain and human decency should forbid to much rage-fishing. This way its just another try to kick other people from the game.
I see a difference in legit game mechanics and human behaviour. It is legit to gank ships, but there is no reason to hoss around and humiliate the victim further. Again, i do not see that in a standard ganker, but quiet often from codies.

Play EvE and not "as?hole"!


"Be the villain" means "I can do whatever I want".
"Roleplaying" means "I get away with everything as long as I pretend to be nice".

At least in their disconnected minds.

But lots of carebears are in no way better.
These people are united by hypocrisy and lack of *understanding* of empathy.

You have to consider that too many people are bears.
Be it nullbears, carebears or gankbears, these people share a weak mind and low actual self esteem.

The only solution is to get rid of *all* of them.



Anyhow.

One can not make a mind be aware about what it not ever has experienced by itself,
thus we can only wait for CCP to permaban the lot of them.



And there are many. And most don't even know.
Like that one guy, for example.



And they will take it deeply personal,
as they are showing us already.

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#90 - 2014-10-02 09:49:10 UTC
La Rynx wrote:
Point 2) however is some problem, where some sad entities want to elicit rage.


Sure. But unless they *do* something *wrong* to elicit that rage, CCP would need a team of mind readers to punish them.

Quote:
Point 4) Another Problem case: Those Point 2) entities try to elicit rage and provoke Verbal abuse. That might not excuse every outbreak, but it excuses quite a lot.


Nope. This is a game for adults (and near adults due to CCP's silly T rating). If someone cannot prevent themselves from hurling insults and/or threats over losing at a *game* that they freely choose to participate in, the fault is entirely on them.

It also, once again, goes into finding psychics to determine the intent behind otherwise legitimate actions.

Quote:
but there is no reason to hoss around and humiliate the victim further. Again, i do not see that in a standard ganker, but quiet often from codies.


Roleplaying is perfectly legitimate gameplay, and I haven't seen anything from Code. that amounts to much more than posting the killmail in local and suggesting that the target pay into the extortion scheme part of Code.'s business model, dressed up in their roleplaying framework.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Solecist Project
#91 - 2014-10-02 09:50:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Solecist Project
RubyPorto wrote:
Roleplaying is perfectly legitimate gameplay, and I haven't seen anything from Code. that amounts to much more than posting the killmail in local and suggesting that the target pay into the extortion scheme part of Code.'s business model, dressed up in their roleplaying framework.
I did.


Like ... seriously ... all you are saying is that "I do not know anything about that" ...
... as if that meant anything. It doesn't.



Maybe you should finally start finding out what's going on?



Quote:
It also, once again, goes into finding psychics to determine the intent behind otherwise legitimate actions.
And this is gold.
This has nothing to do with psychics.


If you are clueless about people ...
... as you show with such a post ...
... then maybe you should not talk about such things.



RubyPorto wrote:
La Rynx wrote:
Point 2) however is some problem, where some sad entities want to elicit rage.


Sure. But unless they *do* something *wrong* to elicit that rage, CCP would need a team of mind readers to punish them.
No.

All it needs is people who are skilled in listening and interpreting what others are saying.
Like ... hell, neurolinguistic programmers.
You probably call these "psychics" too, right?


But actually this is way too much. What it needs is just normal people.
People who feel what others are saying. Not self centered, empathyless hypocrites.


I know that the ability to actually understand and feel others is getting removed from society,
but that doesn't mean that the blind people get to dictate the seeing ones how the world works.



Is it in your mind too, that, as long as one seems to be nice,
he does nothing wrong, even though he is actually just a hypocrite *******?

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
Solecist Project
#92 - 2014-10-02 10:00:33 UTC
Meh ... not happy with this new portrait.

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#93 - 2014-10-02 10:50:09 UTC  |  Edited by: RubyPorto
Solecist Project wrote:
Like ... seriously ... all you are saying is that "I do not know anything about that" ...
... as if that meant anything. It doesn't.


It means exactly that I haven't seen the claimed phenomena, nothing more. Which is exactly the level of certainty with which anyone can rightly talk about the non-existence of any phenomena*. This is why the burden of proof is on the person making the positive claim.

I also haven't seen any evidence of the claimed phenomena except for the examples Veers keeps alluding to which already resulted in bans, if that helps. If you'd like to provide evidence, I'd be happy to see it.

*at least without a proof of that phenomena's impossibility, or something similar to provide bounds for the probability of that phenomena's existance. I am not Pascal, I do not wager.

Solecist Project wrote:
All it needs is people who are skilled in listening and interpreting what others are saying.
Like ... hell, neurolinguistic programmers.
You probably call these "psychics" too, right?


Say we have two situations: in one I decide hold someone for a singing ransom, they get angry at the request and respond with typed abuse. In the other, I decide to hold someone for a singing ransom, they sing a song and everybody involved has a good time. All other parts of the situation are identical except that in one, my intent is bad.

So, In which situation is my intent bad?


If one invitation to ransom is abusive and the other isn't, then you can easily infer intent. But that abusive invitation is someone doing something wrong, for which they can be punished regardless of their intent.


If gankers are actually harassing their targets, they should be disciplined by CCP for harassment per CCP's existing policies.


Quote:
Is it in your mind too, that, as long as one seems to be nice,
he does nothing wrong, even though he is actually just a hypocrite *******?


In my world, we don't punish people for thinking the wrong thoughts unless those thoughts are accompanied by wrong words or actions. We also punish people for wrong words and actions regardless of their thoughts. So really, their thoughts seem pretty much irrelevant to disciplinary decisions.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
La Rynx
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#94 - 2014-10-02 11:10:29 UTC
Solecist Project wrote:


"Be the villain" means "I can do whatever I want".
"Roleplaying" means "I get away with everything as long as I pretend to be nice".

At least in their disconnected minds.

But lots of carebears are in no way better.
These people are united by hypocrisy and lack of *understanding* of empathy.

You have to consider that too many people are bears.
Be it nullbears, carebears or gankbears, these people share a weak mind and low actual self esteem.

The only solution is to get rid of *all* of them.

Hm since i consider ALL players to be a carebear in some way, this can not be done.

Its fine to be *play* evil, still this excludes extra nagging other humans behind the alts. Metagaming is no excuse. Worse Metagaming is an excuse, made to often.

About playing and angering other players:
Dosis facit venenum
it is the dose that makes the poison.

In my oppinion, singransoms, kills, wardecs, scams, even bonusrooms are doable. Still you need to keep in mind, that you are playing with other humans and have at least a basic amount of respect.

Atomic Virulent : "You can't spell DOUCHE. without CODE."
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#95 - 2014-10-02 11:11:42 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
La Rynx wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:

Veers is claiming a number of things that he (characteristically) is unwilling to provide evidence for:
1) Gankers gank for no legitimate in-game purpose
2) Gankers harass their targets to produce tears
3) Gankers are bad people for doing their in-game activity
4) Verbal abuse isn't really agaist the rules if you're really mad because of someone's legitimate in-game activity
and several others.


So Veers is on a mission like this j315 guy.

1) I do not have a problem with ganking, since it keeps highsec interesting.

Point 2) however is some problem, where some sad entities want to elicit rage.

3) This is to general, some Point 2) entities lack social competences. Ganking alone is not evil.

Point 4) Another Problem case: Those Point 2) entities try to elicit rage and provoke Verbal abuse. That might not excuse every outbreak, but it excuses quite a lot. If one needs others despair and anger so badly, they should play "the Sims4". Everywhere else, halve a Brain and human decency should forbid to much rage-fishing. This way its just another try to kick other people from the game.
I see a difference in legit game mechanics and human behaviour. It is legit to gank ships, but there is no reason to hoss around and humiliate the victim further. Again, i do not see that in a standard ganker, but quiet often from codies.

Play EvE and not "as?hole"!


I play EVE as an ******** with pride thank you very much, and the emotional reactions I elicit are intentional. I don't care what you think that makes me, I'm out to make my enemies mad so that they're more likely lose when it comes time to fight. I'm out to get them emotional so they'll slip up and shoot me when I'm baiting. I have a bunch of reasons, as do others, to elicit emotional knee jerk reactions that are perfectly valid methods of psychological warfare.

You think this doesn't happen in other games? Do you know what teabagging in Halo was intended to do? Elicit a rage response that would cause people to blindly come after you for revenge. In their emotional state, they become predictable and easy to drop. I could literally write a novel on the different forms of psychological warfare used in various online games. The only people that have a problem with it are the people that fail at it, and demonstrably so. As a result, they're the ones losing to it.

*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
La Rynx
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#96 - 2014-10-02 11:21:33 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:
La Rynx wrote:
Point 2) however is some problem, where some sad entities want to elicit rage.


Sure. But unless they *do* something *wrong* to elicit that rage, CCP would need a team of mind readers to punish them.

Since they often are to narcistic and do it in the open:
No mindreaders needed, one needs just to check their homepage.

RubyPorto wrote:

Quote:
Point 4) Another Problem case: Those Point 2) entities try to elicit rage and provoke Verbal abuse. That might not excuse every outbreak, but it excuses quite a lot.


Nope. This is a game for adults (and near adults due to CCP's silly T rating). If someone cannot prevent themselves from hurling insults and/or threats over losing at a *game* that they freely choose to participate in, the fault is entirely on them.

I expect the same from the griefers. Beeing adult. Whats happens at those times are abuses of social mechanics.
Actio / Reactio
Quit pro Quo

RubyPorto wrote:

Roleplaying is perfectly legitimate gameplay, and I haven't seen anything from Code. that amounts to much more than posting the killmail in local and suggesting that the target pay into the extortion scheme part of Code.'s business model, dressed up in their roleplaying framework.


Then you must be looking with closed eyes or ignore every reference that there is.

Atomic Virulent : "You can't spell DOUCHE. without CODE."
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#97 - 2014-10-02 12:28:08 UTC
La Rynx wrote:
Since they often are to narcistic and do it in the open:
No mindreaders needed, one needs just to check their homepage.


Which means CCP needs to make sure it's actually theirs, and that it's an accurate representation, etc. etc. etc. CCP would be stepping into a minefield if they decided to discipline players based on 3rd party evidence. Luckily, they have logs.

And again, if it's so easy to find this evidence of harassment or abuse, why haven't you presented it?

La Rynx wrote:
I expect the same from the griefers. Beeing adult.

Actually, you seem to expect *more* from gankers.
La Rynx wrote:
That might not excuse every outbreak, but it excuses quite a lot.


Why do some players get a pass from you for abusive behavior and not others?

Also, griefing is against the rules in EVE, and any instances should be reported.

La Rynx wrote:
Then you must be looking with closed eyes or ignore every reference that there is.


So pick your favorite example and explain how it rises to CCP's definition of harassment or abuse. You're making the positive claim.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Mag's
Azn Empire
#98 - 2014-10-02 13:46:03 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
La Rynx wrote:
In my oppinion, singransoms, kills, wardecs, scams, even bonusrooms are doable. Still you need to keep in mind, that you are playing with other humans and have at least a basic amount of respect.
I find this rather ironic, considering all the hate mail and verbal abuse I have suffered over the years from the so called 'moral high ground' crew.

*Snip* Removed reply to a deleted post. ISD Ezwal.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
La Rynx
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#99 - 2014-10-02 14:49:36 UTC
RubyPorto wrote:

And again, if it's so easy to find this evidence of harassment or abuse, why haven't you presented it?

I answered that already.

RubyPorto wrote:

Actually, you seem to expect *more* from gankers.

Actually I want the same adult behavior from both parties.
Why is that "expecting more from gankers?"
Are gankers somewhat excused?

RubyPorto wrote:

Why do some players get a pass from you for abusive behavior and not others?

No pass for any party, but still the one who provokes is a hypocrit when he acts suprised. Following forums and discussions some guy have admitted, that they want provoke such reactions to force a ban of their victims.

RubyPorto wrote:

Also, griefing is against the rules in EVE, and any instances should be reported.

Yes, very funny. Enough stuff is borderline and when CCP decides it is finaly "enough", a wave of tears breaks loose.
See the Book of tears from Jimmy at TMC

Why so eager that i petion so much?
You wanna go for the unspoken
"go petition it and be quite here!"?

CCP acts on RL threats, but despite some guys saying CCP is stupid, they are not.
They also can see when RL threats where provoked by previous actions of the aleged "victim"

Atomic Virulent : "You can't spell DOUCHE. without CODE."
Snuse
Sofakroken Mineralutvinning AS
#100 - 2014-10-02 14:50:35 UTC
Am I the only one that, as a miner, enjoy the risk of getting attacked, even in high sec. What is the game if there is no risk to it, wouln't that be plain and boring in the long run?