EVE General Discussion

I like how you think that any of those things you listed even add up to the ganking insurance removal, let alone everything else.

The only thing that has been nerfed more than attacking people in highsec is Caldari, and that's saying something.

You aren't entitled to your own version of the truth, much though you may parade it around.

The truth is that highsec has gotten safer and safer all the while. And the truth is that CCP has recently discovered that highsec safety is a bad thing that cripples player interaction and by extension retention as well.

What needs to be done doesn't change just because it might make some anti social parasites balk.

one thing about this thread that has been prevalent is the constant baloney that some how those in non player corps are some how victims. It then devolves into protecting non player corp rights , providing them equal access to eve game play.
Then wardecs are constantly bought up as being a problem and the whole discussion falls apart.

To see the apathetic attitude in this thread towards player corps should serve as a wake up call that one of the core features of eve is in trouble. All this defending of the non player corps and the needless complication of discussing wardecs has successfully derailed the entire discussion several times.

Reading the csm response to this is even more worrisome as it highlights how they are focused primarily on adding something new and shiny to the game . the lack of forethought into the ramifications of its deployment is either intentional (awaiting dev blog) or it is an oversight. regardless, little has been said to the effect that extended social features will not negatively effect player corps.

repeatedly the concern is glossed over.

i would like to see player corps get a big fat buff out of this. unfortunately that is not the way this seems to be headed. it looks to be a feature that will further empower players to have less reliance on player corps encouraging a stronger soloist play style to eve.

you may start with taking exception to that, how does social tools enable stronger solo play you may be wondering.

To start with you have to look at the basic of eve online game play.

Eve Online, the players are the content. eve is one of the more unique and arguably interesting mmos to the outside world because of this feature. Interplayer dependence is critical to its lively hood, but not in the fashion you may think.

inter player dependence is beneficial when it promotes content creation, not content consumption.

social tools that allows for even more players to enage in content consumption while attributing little to nothing in content creation is what makes themparking a threat to eve online. You can look at the majority of other mmos and see content consumption based content is detrimental to the game. with out the vibrant and chaotic content creation of players the games become stale or require great efforts from the dev teams to prevent the game from becoming monotonous.

the arguments based in this thread have shown the desire and protectionist agenda in allowing for more content consumption, with out the creation of player created content. allowing for social tools that empower soloist players to further engage in consumption based game play with out attributing to player created content is detrimental to eve. This creates the need for more dev created content that further emboldens soloist play styles. You may argue that solo players using social tools to group up with more solo players is a win for eve online. Actually it creates even more non player created content consumption. Which has been an underlying theme at times in this thread .

Player corps should be the cornerstone of eve online these should be the content generators of eve. players should be engaged with player corps creating in game content for us all to play and enjoy. tools that take away from that are detrimental to eve. player created content is what drives eve online. while the devs storyline and their content is great , that is not the content that brings players to this game. it is the player corps and what those players produce within those corps that drive this game. Soloist players using social tools do not add to this either. what makes eve great is it player corps and the content generated from them.

defending those in non player corps, engaged in non player content consumption while enabling them with further tools to strengthen this consumption is what the entire turmoil in this thread is about. Pointing out that non player corp players are fully capable of creating player content and emergent game play does little to ensure that player corps remain the driving force of eve online. while this emergent game play highlights non player corp characters working to create player created content is wonderful. It also further demonstrates that enhanced social tools are not needed to allow for non player corp characters to work together effectively. Further empowerment of non player corp tools will be detrimental to player corps and further empower the soloist player to engage in the non player content consumption. it is not about isolating non player corp characters or keeping them from having more fun in game . its about keeping them as an actual ingame asset of game content, that can be engaged with to further create player created content and less consumption of dev created content.

Player created content tools is what should be the primary focus of eve online, not tools that allow for players to create stronger farming groups that return little in the way of player created content .

I don't believe that is true, that's the problem. I believe that while some mechanics have made some aspects of it safer, others have not, and people's ability to play the mechanics has improved as knowledge of those mechanics have. When I joined I never saw gankers, hell I didn't even know it was possible for a few years, and rarely if ever did I see a wardec. That's hardly the case now, it's safer in nullsec.

And don;t misunderstand me, I believe highsec should be a lot safer than other space, since that's it's design. You seem to have a pretty twisted view of what "high security" is. I find it endlessly amusing that players like you hang out in a section of space designed to have more safety, purposely making it as unsafe as possible, then get all upset when CCP maintains it's position as a safer area of the game.

That's actually you misunderstanding what CCP have stated (and by the looks of it taking great liberties with it too), but never mind.

What needs to be done is being done, you just don't like it. That version of the game that you want, the one were noobs arrive and you instantly get targets to shoot and spend your day making their lives hell, that doesn't exist. EVE isn't your personal playpen where CCP recruit players for you to farm, it;s a sandbox game for a range of player types. What CCP are doing is the right thing which is looking for ways to entertain all groups of players without focussing too much on appeasing a single group.

And this tired old strawman again.

My suggestions are weighted towards encouraging conflict, because that is what keeps people playing this game, not chewing on rocks.

Just because you don't like the truth, doesn't make it any less true.

Some time ago there was 'truth' that Earth is flat and sitting on top of some animals.... Some people didn't believe to it and now you are talking about Moon landing....

Except it's not, since it's only your opinion that highsec has gotten safer. People like you and Feyd spew all this rubbish about highsec, actively refusing the acknowledge all of the buffs you've received and stating that because you've disregarded those buffs that there must be a net gain to safety. When I started, I didn't have to worry about half the stuff people now have to look out for every time they do anything in highsec. It's not safer now, the sources of risk are simply more varied and significantly more common.

"Except it's not" and "rubbish" are fine things to say I guess, but none of it makes a cogent argument. I haven't seen you post a crisp list of "buffs" in opposition to the list Feyd has provided. Until you do, it seems like all you have to wave around is your opinion.

What you have to personally worry about, and the things you see when looking around are anecdotes. The plural of anecdotes is not fact.

+1 A great example of who otherwise intelligent people can be limited by their own prejudices and biases. Kell is the poster boy for it.

I mean it's silly, I fly I high sec every night and have for most of the last 8 years (and while Kell can dismiss Kaarous as a ganker, he can't do that with me). It's MUCH safer, there were no safeties before, no target spectrum lock breakers, fewer "you are about to do something stupid" pop ups etc etc. High Sec is a veritable nanny state now, more so than at any point in the game's history, all of which I've used to protect my isk making activities. Hellfire, I'm wardecced by Marmite RIGHT NOW and haven't lost a damn thing it's so easy to stay safe. Too easy, I MWD/cloak tricked past a marmite camp like a hour ago

Try again. I pay CCP to participate in a sandbox. It's up to me to use the tools at my disposal to avoid the greifer crowd. It's also up to me to call them on their bull$#it when they try to remove any means we have of denying them.

1/10 practice harder.