EVE General Discussion

If you want to see pilots being docked even more then yes by all means, make it low/null-sec, and then of course watch as local gets more empty as pilots quit.

High-sec is a good social part of the game for those of us that are perhaps not so into pvp'ing every second you undock.

/c

What some people don't seem to understand is that there is nothing like "imaginary" losses in EvE. Either you lose RL money investment because you bought a PLEX to buy the things you just lost, or you lose the time you spent earning that ISK in game, for example with the terrible PvE it has. If most ways to make ISK in this game weren't so boring that they were sensed like a second job, I'm convinced people would be more willing to risk their ships.

No, why should something that is a MASSIVE part of the game that also have been there since the beginning of EVE go away?

Why not just remove all content in space so everyone can just sit in station spinning ships fapping over who have the most spinning while you are at it?

No, but it should be made far less lucrative.

Never having mined in a capital ship myself, how does your veldnaught stack up against a troll fleet of CODE. exhumers / mining barges that drop on you and start eating the rocks out from under you? Never not PvP when you're undocked.

As to the OP's question, getting rid of highsec would be as dumb as making Concord invincible. It would be better if CCP invested some real time and resources into making sure that risk and reward scaled properly from high to null (and nerfed Concrd back a buff or two).

I didn't mean to make it sound that nothing happens in low or null, I meant more that turning high-sec into low or null would most likely make many pilots not wanting to undock at all - I would be one of them that wouldn't fancy undocking unless I need to since the risk just increased 100 times.

I'm fully aware that there's pvp to be found if wanted, both consentual and non-consentual. But I do believe that pilots who enjoy safety will undock even less if there's only low-sec and null.

/c

No - higsec play important role in eve.
Maybe putting more lowsec between empires could be interesting, but no one in CCP will want to get this kind of workload on their desk.

Well, if you want to completely destroy EVE Online, sure.

If you're worried about losing time in a game then you shouldn't be playing one. Games are effectively a time sink.

PLEX doesn't have a real monetary value when its redeemed and becomes part of the game it has an isk value. Problem is people start to compare what it cost before it entered the game and start to make comparisons, like that carrier is worth such and such (real monetary value). When in fact the carrier is only worth isk.

I bought 2 PLEX when I started and sold them in Jita, I don't think of that isk as having a real monetary value the value is restricted to in-game.

Yes you can use isk to buy PLEX and extend game time, all you are really doing is getting a free month whilst the person buying the PLEX from CCP is paying for it and when the PLEX is redeemed in-game and sold they get the isk from the person buying the PLEX off of the in-game market.

So the barrier to losing space pixels is created by the people wrongly considering game time and isk as having a real monetary value.

Let me just write down some actual thoughts here.

These pie charts represent figures from a few years ago, but CCP don't seem to have released more recent ones (or if they have, I'm an idiot and can't find them), so let's use these ones as the most accurate representation we currently have. Just under three quarters of EVE's population lives in hi-sec, meaning that for every dollar CCP makes in profit, 71 cents were earned from a character in hi-sec. At this point I could pretty much stop - the fact that hi-sec comprises 70% of CCP's income is basically a QED in itself. Removing it or significantly nerfing its income or level of available content would destroy the game, because a vast number of players would leave.

However, whenever this statistic is brought up, there's always a counterargument, which I feel like pre-emptively addressing since it's stupid.

"The majority of those figures are hi-sec alts of people who live in other types of space!"

The first problem is that the only reasonable answer to this is "yeah, so what?" People wouldn't have hi-sec alts if there wasn't a benefit to being able to operate there. If you strip away the benefits of hi-sec, there'll be no reason to have them. The second problem with this is that the maths don't even hold water. Let us hypothesise that every single person in low-sec, null-sec and w-space has precisely one hi-sec alt. This would comprise a faction 28.5% of the total playercount in size. "Legitimate" hi-sec dwellers would still comprise 35.75% of the total playercount, no longer being the clear majority but still being the plurality. In any case, we can be relatively certain that not every player who doesn't live primarily in hi-sec has a hi-sec alt.

Hi-sec isn't ever going to go away. I absolutely wouldn't mind seeing a little rebalancing to reinvigorate the other types of space, but people are either going to have to get used to the idea of "living in hi-sec" being a legitimate and permanent playstyle or they're going to have to leave the game. CCP is not going to commit financial suicide to appease people who provide them less money.