EVE General Discussion

And there is nothing wrong with fixing, but is important to consider the other inhabitants.

CODE. is a great part of eve. The only real criminal enterprise in what is supposed to be player run. You have a playstyle and purpose of this post is to expand on it, yet?

What you are asking is to improve how you live in the country at expense of others though.

Think of it this way. Said previous post, but eve is a game. People will not adapt, they will move on. Like moving out of a city that is crappy to live in. What no concord without a significant level of other mechanics is the same as telling somebody to take losses for no gains, while removal of concord gains the criminal element of eve and incur less losses.

So if you are wanting no concord, then highsec people need to gain the means to offset. For you to gain the means to pirate without concord (A GUARANTEE) instead of player police (A SLOWER RESPONSE POTENTIAL) Then you will have to have loss somewhere else to counter it.

Else those who took the loss will get tired of the cost and move out.

Its not about pushing. Pushing never works with many in real life and also in game where its even easier to just stop playing instead of dealing with the stick. My ex is a gamer, hardcore, she loves MMOs and I convinced her to try Eve after a while. She HATED being interrupted every 5 mins in null doign whatever it was she was doing, yes she had a WoW/Everquest style MMO background. She ganked and got ganked, she pvped... though she hated doing it, logied, mined ice, ore, ratted and explored. We literally did everything. High, low and null. Only place I didnt take her was a wh.

She was the kind of person that liked to chill and do stuff and see results without the need to make stuff blow up. She would help logi wise and loved that. But she wasnt the type to go out and shoot people. 85% of the people that leave that dont blow up are more or less like her. They need a reason and a purpose beyond the explosions. They arent driven by adrenaline or risk. They are driven by goal oriented accomplishments that the adrenaline junkies find BOOOOOORRRRRIIIINNNGG!! Btw this is coming from a guy that got so bored in real life on a run I decided to run in the middle of the street and when that got boring I started running over the cars that came towards me. Adrenaline is such a fun drug.

But if players cannot understand this difference between players you will never be able to grasp a world full and complete that actually works imo.



Now as for the OP..... it will be gamed, hardcore and badly and turned into null sec which is great until YOU get kicked out by a bigger force because tbh 99% of people that post are NOT the ruling elite in this game nor have the critical mass to do so. It just is a fact and not an insult. Its how life works.

Despite your fail troll attempt of misquoting my posted reply, I'll answer your allegations towards me. Especially since you can't even consider doing what I suggested, create your player police force and occupy / patrol a few low sec systems, turn them into NRDS, invite players there and show us your idea can work.

As for your suggestion making me scared, yes it does indeed scare me. Not because my ship might be attacked and destroyed. Hell, that's pretty much commonplace in high sec right now despite Concord and their quick response time. Your suggestion will only create anarchy which will perpetuate chaos and mayhem. Your version of high security will become nothing more than a wasteland. When this game first started, there was no Concord or high security. Why do you think CCP added them to the game? Ask yourself why does a majority of the playerbase conduct gameplay in high security?

Because Concord and their response time is a major deterrent for those who want to turn this game into a massive 'Shoot Em Up Free For All'. Your suggestion of removing Concord probably includes Gate and Station guns as well. Your big idea will only end up driving a majority of the playerbase away. What scares me is that would more than likely cause CCP to go bankrupt and end up shutting down the servers. Then we all lose out on being able to enjoy this great game. That's what scares me.

Now it sounds like you're looking for a 'Free For All Shoot Em Up' Sci-Fi game. I suggest you either go to Low Sec, Null Sec or W-space for that. Better yet, go do a Google search for another game and stop trying to ruin this great game.



DMC

i see nothing here but conjecture and superstition. you have no proof at all.

OK so maybe EVE is not for everyone, those that are prepared to own it are the only ones deserving of it.

and i think the playerbase is a bit more resilient than all of these doomsayers claiming that most highsec players would rather leave EVE than fight for it. just because you might run don't mean the rest of us cannot make it work.

so who would leave? let them speak for themselves.

o/

Yes, it is conjecture, but it is based off experiences and business model. So the opener.

"What would it bring to your game experience you cannot get elsewhere?"

Modify the bounty system? Yes, it could work if the play itself is viable. I would be interested in part of a policing corp, but if piracy, it would be only hit and run, or people hanging out hoping for a fight. If i cannot shoot first, then the system will never work since pirates would never engage or be gone before on grid. That alone makes player policing highly improbable.

So we are not bringing something to the game. Only taking away something. If nothing is being brought, then how could it not be true.

Personally, if it was just remove concord and add bounty? I would leave. It would be frustrating and always chasing or exposing yourself. I know a good many people that have left because of the existing gank mechanic. A good in game friend from when I started eve? Big in markets, it was his play. Got tired of all the ganking as it stands, and now make it worse?

I know other people, jaded from it and left reasons for the same that I would. We like to experience and move around highsec. Now we are being locked into tiny pockets and having to fight just cause we want to visit amarr. Relying entirely on random people to hopefully be camping, which as stated before wouldn't happen since any camp would promptly be met by a bigger force designed to counter. People who prefer PvP would rather go out looking for a fight then wait for an unfair disadvantage sitting for one. From when I was in nullsec. Nobody liked sitting in the station waiting for the reds to show up.

And lastly, and most critically, many years of working with newbeans. Ones who get that gank early on, then I gotta explain to them that eve is about repurcussions, not prevention. Then the fun part of saying that alts and isk really means the punishment is nothing. They ask how to protect, and I can only say tank more. They log in a couple more times then quit the game.

Number one cause of quitting for everybody I know both RL and online has been they think that the highsec ganking is supid enough as it is. Overwhelmingly more than I have met who decide they want to get into piracy. Make it even more bias to the pirates and those numbers will shift more.

So yes, it is conjecture, but conjecture based on psychology and the way markets work. If people wanted to pirate and gank more, than highsec wouldn't be the most populated part of eve.



Very good point. Any anti pirate group operating out of highsec would very quickly find themself under the perma wardec and not able to do anything at all.

EDIT: Adding to my bit before the quote. If we had number breakdowns, it would be interesting. The number of people highsec mining, mission running, just doing markets and hauling, etc. Every miner is somebody who contributes to the ability of low and nullsec to destroy ships. Each one that quits because the game is less enjoyable is that much more stuff will cost and harder to get on the market. Same goes for mission runners. I run missions, get LP and put stuff on the market that sells fast. Who knows how many implants and Navy gear I have put on the market over the years.

Now markets are higher, ships are more expensive, makes pvp harder since now will have to do more farming to support it. Making your isk is now also harder since the alts are getting killed by the same thing they wanted.

A few years ago these same naysayers would have complained that hisec ganking was making players quit in droves, and when CCP proved them wrong, they turned a blind eye. Claimed CCP was misreading their own data.

You waste your time arguing with people that are willfully ignorant of facts, or make assumptions based on their fears.

Carebears claim EVE would die without CONCORD, but they are using the same flawed logic that helped them rationalize the 'gankers are killing EVE' argument. They have no data to support their claim, just fear and self doubt.

Au contraire, mon ami. I never said anyone was trolling. You're in a game where the first rule is "trust no one". Then you propose an idea that is based somewhat on the concept of trust? I just said it was funny...and BS (bovine scatology).

Trolling? Perish the thought. I have to admit, though. If you weren't trolling you could have been as
you've managed to snag a string of really ridiculous ideas.

Really?

What data do you have to support your claim that a lot of players have a 'phantasm' about throwing other players out of the game?

It's not what i have said. I have said : "it's the phantasm of a lot of "elite" pvpers around these forums"
The datas ? Read these forums.
We at least agree on one thing : it's not at all representative of the opinion of the majority of the players.

Also, you trust CCP's datas ?

As has been repeatedly shown in every single 'fix the bounty system' thread, it is impossible to make it worth hunting people with bounties without breaking the system and making it even more profit for the gankers