Jita Park Speakers Corner

CCP has announced that the next expansion should be focused on war.

Seriously, both Malcanis and Hans should run for CSM this year- I think people like you will be needed.

Oh man, where to begin. A lot of big ideas here to respond to! Apologies for the one-liner post before, I was on my cell phone and unable to unleash one of my typically verbose brain-dumps.

Yuki - Thanks for pointing out a detail that I did indeed overlook, though I think this further reinforces my intial reaction that you, along with Fazmarai and others here, are indeed adverse to the idea of combat encroaching upon a bubble zone in the middle of the map, so to speak.

One of the points I was trying to reinforce earlier is that the safety of an area does not always have to do with Concord or NPC ship protection. Yes, Jita could become a 0.1 security system under Malcanis plan, should the Gallente and Caldari militia wars rage that close. But the bottom line is that in the end, highsec has already demonstrated itself MORE hostile than a huge swath of 0.1 space and 0.0 space, so I don't understand why the numerical security status change of a system is cause for such alarm among highsec dwellers.

So many players are accustomed to freely moving goods through all three zones, high, null, and low in between, simply adjusting ship types, scout strategies, or trade routes to adjust for the varying degrees of the likelihood of attack along the way, which as I said, often has little to do with the security level of a system.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that all of EvE is already more or less a war-zone. War is the engine that drives the need for everything the miners and industrialists produce. This is all one interconnected ecosystem of death, that benefits everyone the most when it churns often, and churns everywhere.

Deepening the mechanics and adding consequence to things like the Faction Warfare system, handing things like Customs Offices over to players to manage, these are huge steps forward if the goal is to make the sandbox more sandy. Development has and always will proceed in the direction of handing more control over to the players, which inevitability means that things that are not warred over today, will be warred over tomorrow. There is no stopping this.

This is why I heartily encourage those who enjoy PvE and Industry, mining, and manufacturing, exploration and peaceful diplomacy - to shed the tinfoil that highsec has provided for so long, realize that they are as unsafe there as in any other space, develop the tools needed to live and operate ANYWHERE in New Eden, stop blaming the PvP crowd for "ruining" a haven that doesn't really exist, and ultimately empower themselves to do even MORE of what they already enjoy, in many more places, and at even greater profit margins.

Jonathan Malcom - you deserve a medal. Your observations about the AI in this game are spot on. The sooner we blur the line between the way a ship is fit and used for PvE vs PvP, the more every pilot will be challenged, entertained, and empowered to experience more content and territory than ever before. CCP deserves praise for their work with Incursions and Sleeper upgrades, because finally EvE obtained PvE content on par with what the other MMO's have already been dishing out for years, gamers can handle a tough fight. I dont really see anyone defending the "tank an entire room and slowly dps ships one at a time" approach as being vasty more entertaining or fulfilling a way to make isk.

If EvE PvE prepares pilots for PvP as well, and enables them to enjoy a lot more of the game they might not otherwise have tried, the entire community benefits. Ultimately, the "PvE crowd vs PvP crowd" divide, or having an industrial player base that is uncomfortable operating in and around the conflict that fuels their sales to begin with, these are situations that divide communities and shrink the social fabric of the game, not expand and deepen it.

RAGE ALERT RAGE ALERT.

I just spend the last 20 minutes typing a response to Temba, but the forums ate it. I'm so pissed right now. This is ridiculous.

Anyways, I'll respond tomorrow, when I'm more rested and less angry. Time for bed, I just don't have it in my soul to rewrite something I've already written at the moment....

No matter what browser I use, I get different errors too. There's a specific set of quirks to each one, and no matter what I use I forget which ones to avoid.

Seriousy, CCP, this should be community outreach gesture and development priority 101 - you can't take care of customer service when the place customers have to use their voices is so fundamentally broken.

And yes, believe it or not; I read everything.

0.0 needs attention for many reasons; not the least of which, is that it is becoming less attractive to those that live there. 80% of space should count for a greater than 10-20% of the game population. It being completely empty, save for a few localized clusters is extremely unusual.

It bears mentioning though; that NPC 0.0 does not have the same problem. This indicates that at least half the problem, is the 0.0 population, and not completely CCPs responsibility.

Also, the measuring of Sec status in Highsec, (and through Lowsec I believe), being too generic and poorly divided and defined. 1.0 should be secure space, with each 0.1 drop below that losing a measure of security; not just Concord response time. Perhaps Concord should only exist in 0.7 and up; with Faction Navys functioning below that, to 0.5.

This would of course, require systems in major trade routes to gain an increasing Security status. A highway if you will, safely guarded from one Empire to another; with no less than a 0.7 Security Status. Shifts like this can easily occur in geopolitical borders; so it is not hard to explain.

Personally, I think this would make EVE much more interesting; while allowing for a much more dynamic environment.

Thanks again for the kind words, Temba.

Since you asked me to clarify my position, I should explain that I’m not someone who’s out to see all of high sec burn with the fires of war, nor do I relish the thought of all of New Eden becoming some homogenous hostile space in terms of security.

Personally, I’ve always been a fan of consensual PvP in the sense that I’d prefer to live in an area where I have an abundance of known enemies to fight, who fight because they enjoy PvP not because they’re trying to avoid it at all costs and I want to see them suffer perversely . The industrials I have attacked before made the choice to fly through a clearly posted warzone and accepted that risk voluntarily. I think suicide ganks don’t really count as “PvP” as the target rarely fights back, nor am I impressed much with those that make that kind of gameplay their lifestyle.

This is as good a time as any to admit that my personal bias in all of this is being a pilot who has lived in the Hed constellation since I was about a month old, meaning that Amamake has always been part of my daily “commuter route”. As anyone can see from my killboard I’ve done a lot of stuff in lowsec that isn’t PvP (anyone else living in my area has a vastly higher kill count) meaning I’ve done my share of mining, hauling, manufacturing, in and out of high sec, through Amamake which is statistically the most dangerous system in the game.

Despite this “danger” I’ve never really felt as though I’m taking some huge risk to my operations , as a result of simply adapting my ships flown and piloting technique used, to almost completely mitigate the chance of attack. When I AM attacked, I almost always know the mistake I made, so in my experience, the only risks one is exposed to in lowsec are the ones you place yourself at by making in error in flying the wrong ship the wrong way through a gatecamp.

I don’t say any of this to boast, I don’t consider myself anything special in terms of skill, I’m just saying that those that stick to highsec because of a perceived fear of danger in lowsec need not be as intimidated by the thought of operating in lowsec as they might imagine. And a large number of highsec dwellers haven’t strayed beyond high sec before, its more to these folks that I’ve been speaking to. I’ve never come across an activity I could do in highsec that I couldn’t do for more isk / hour in lowsec with the *same* likelihood of losing a ship, provided I was paying attention to what I was doing.

This more than anything summarises what I'd like to see in hi-sec PvP: more development on tools and mechanisms to allow the players to shape hi-sec to what they believe it should be, rather than watching helplessly while Mr CONCORD Man has all the fun. Bounty Hunting and Faction Warfare should become tools for players to make hi-sec "safer" from outlaws and hostile militia. Wardecs too, if anyone can come up with a plausible system.

Nullsec should be the place for FFA "anything goes" devil-take-the-hindmost PvP. That's why we have nullsec, after all. Hi-sec is the place for more structured, goal-directed fighting. That's not to say that it should all be chivalrous and consensual - EVE being EVE, there must always be a place for players to be the bad guy, and the option for people to engage in spying, suicide ganking, treachery, scamming, etc should and will always remain viable. But currently there are almost no tools enabling them to be the good guy.

I completely agree with you here. The main reasoning behind you manifesto is sound, and I agree wholeheartedly with what you are, overall, trying to say. Many suggestions to nerf high sec into the floor to force people into low sec have been made as a result of this delusion people, mainly 'leet PvPers', have about high sec space.

BUT

The example changes you have used are not great. As an understatement. Which is a shame really, because the overall shift you are looking for seems like the way forward. We differ greatly on our opinion of how to solve this issue. Allow me to elaborate:



This sums up what I am trying to say nicely. You have a great idea for an overall shift in focus, namely to make a larger distinction between individual sec levels, and ruin it with a pisspoor (in my opinion) solution. "There should be access to activities in 0.5 sec systems that aren't available in higher sec systems" - great overall idea. " For example, some activities that are "CONCORDable" in a 0.9 might merit nothing more than a faction police response in a 0.5" - pisspoor solution. One of the defining features of high sec space is that it is free from pvp, with the exception of suicide ganking. This really should not be changed, unless you split off part of high and low sec and form a distinct 'mid sec' area, with a distinct set of rules as to what is and is not permissible without getting a CONCORD reaction.

"Suppose that all industrial, research and refining had a sec-based modifer applied" - yes, this sounds logical. " for instance that refining ore in a 0.9 would have a maximum possible efficiency of 91%, but in a 0.5 you could get 95%" - most definately not. That doesn't even make sense - why on earth would a small frontier outpost have a better set of refining facilities than the central, core systems such as Amarr itself? All this would do is force people away from high sec into the lower end of high sec/into low sec, something there is absolutely no need for. That simply reinforces the idea that high sec is for beginners only, something that we both agree is nonsense.



(continued on next post)

It shouldn't. And this is precisely what's wrong with the current system that is entirely NPC-driven. These days, the "bandits "that threaten high-sec are NOT the angels, the guristas, the serpentis, or the blood raiders. They are Goonswarm, Goonswarm wannabees, and Hulkageddon participants. CONCORD is currently insufficient to prevent these entities from engaging freely in their gankery, much to the dismay of those that share your vision of a "PvP-free" highsec.



PvP beyond just ganking has already always existed in highsec, through the war dec and the Faction Warfare system. If I travel into Amarr space, the militia and NPC presence alike are free to engage me without repercussions. This is a clear example of the long-standing presence of PvP in highsec, so I'm not sure I agree with your statement that "the defining feature of high sec is that it is free from PvP without a CONCORD response."

What if players could be paid by the wealthy denizens of highsec to assist CONCORD in their defense operations? Goonswarm would no longer just face a slap on the wrist following a gank, they'd face a group of armed security officers waiting for them at the undock when they emerge in their Brutix's and Thrashers, and miners could actually do something proactively instead of remaining victims. To do this though, we do indeed need to remove the "shackles" of a PvP-free high sec and allow for more of this kind of two-way player involvement in security efforts.

PvP in highsec can be consensual and commonplace, if players are brought in as part of security enforcement rather than only partcipating on the aggressing end.

Our corp already does this in Low Sec - since the POCO release we are allowing neutral highsec residents to pay us for blue status and a lower tax rate, and in turn they acquire a lucrative area of lowsec to exploit that is actively patrolled by the Minmatar Militia and kept clean of pirates. The result is a constellation that is actually safer to operate in than many areas of high sec.



Much of this is just fine, though its really already more or less how the security status system already works. CONCORD does indeed respond slower in .5 than in 1.0, and lowsec mission (such as level 5's and Faction Warfare mission) do indeed pay out more than high sec.

Obviously not anywhere to the degree you describe, but this is certainly an area that could use some attention. If nothing else, we all agree that highsec is too homogenous and meaningless in terms of the gradient from a .5 to a 1.0 and the gameplay available in one or another.

No need to apologize :) This is a thread about big ideas, there's no one or two-sentence way to fully reflect on these kind of issues, and I personally enjoy reading all the good stuff being brought up by those on all sides of the debate. We've all written walls of text, those that have gotten this far in the thread are used to it and have the patience to read it all and respond.

Eve needs more "big thinkers" like yourself and the others in this thread who have taken such great lengths to think creatively and propose new ways to expand and deepen our universe.

This is precisely what I'm would like to see change, because the opportunities for non consensual PvP in hi-sec are essentially limited to ganking. There's very little else to do, because bounty hunting is a joke, war decs are so bad that it's not even funny, and FW is, as Hans will surely tell you, in a very poor state indeed.

Hi sec is large, large enough for a variety of playstyles, and it seems like you're actually echoing those "L33t PvPers" you claim to decry by saying that hi-sec is "free from PvP" and therefore PvP is only for nullsec and lo-sec. I will never subscribe to that kind of playstle apartheid. The only reason that people have this massively, horribly mistaken idea that "high sec is free from PvP" is that 3 out of the 4 main options (suicide ganking, FW, wardecs, bounty hunting) are horribly broken. Hi-sec is not, was never meant to be and should not ever be "free from PvP". You are explicitly trying to limit the playstyle options available in hi-sec whereas I am all about trying to expand them.

High sec can never be and should never be a "free from PvP" monty-haul wonderland. The open economy and single shard nature of EVE mean that can never be an option that can co-exist with a FFA and competitive low and null. However I believe that it is and should be possible for people who enjoy the hi-sec lifestyle of high population, easy access to markets to have access to player experiences currently confied to nullsec.

If you want to ascribe an evil piwat ganker motivation to my manifesto, then I suppose it's this: I believe that a very large fraction of people who "hate" PvP actually hate the perception that it's one-sided, the deck is stacked against them, they'll invariably run into gatecamps as soon as they leave hi-sec and so forth. Giving them easy access to limited, optional, and above all convenient PVP-risk situations might help dispel that attitude, from a combination of getting used to risk and learning to deal with it more effectively. My eyes are on the prize of thousands of players feeling that a major aspect of the game previously denied to them is now accessible.

Of course I want more things than that, but it'll do for this reply.