Jita Park Speakers Corner

As you can see I'm not a throw-away alt. I've lived in null-sec and in high-sec and I see some discrepancies that could be rectified between the two. There are also some mechanics changes that I think would be interesting.

Insurance
Change insurance to be part of the player driven economy. In high-sec, all players have access to npc provided insurance. In low and null-sec, players have to seek out player driven insurance companies to insure their ships. This would open up the economy more and allow large null-sec bodies to provide a service to their members.

Insurance should not be limited to hulls. Instead you should be able to buy implant, cargo, module and hull insurance.


High-sec profit making
In Eve, risk and reward scale, from low-risk/low-reward (high-sec), to high-risk/high-reward (null-sec). However there are some opportunities that are gated and unavailable for high-sec dwellers.

Moon-mining
It makes no sense to allow PI in high-sec, but to not allow moon-mining. I’m not suggesting that moon-mining in high-sec should be as profitable as moon-mining in null-sec, just that it should be available.

Capital ship production
A further injustice that high-sec industrialists have to endure is the inability to compete in the capital ship production market. High-sec dwellers should be able to manufacture capital ships just like null-sec industrialists. This would improve the capital ship market and reduce the stranglehold that null-sec has on the production of these ships. I understand that it would be silly to allow an alliance to produce war materiel under the guaranteed safety and protection of concord, so attacking a high-sec capital-ship assembly array should have no consequences and the array’s owner should provide their own protection.

High-sec quality of life improvements
Jump bridges
Null-sec residents have access to speedy travel via both jump bridges and titan bridges. I propose that high-sec should also be given jump bridges to reduce the inequality in New Eden. High sec jump bridges will be owned and operated by concord and will act as an ISK sink. People in high sec can choose to slow boat from gate to gate, or pay a fee for faster travel via the concord jump bridge system. There should be at least one jump bridge route from each empire to each of the other empires.

Taxes
High-sec taxes should be overhauled. Corp tax in high-sec should be made up of a combination of a corp tax + an empire tax. I propose that the empire portion of the tax fluctuate over time (maybe / quarter?). This would give incentives for high-sec dwellers to move around to take advantage of a lower tax rate in a different region. This would help to prevent high-sec from stagnating.

Taxes could be applied to different activities rather than being a blanket tax - this would encourage research to move to systems with a low research tax whereas ratters would migrate to places with a low bounty tax. Using taxes in this way would make the high-sec economy more dynamic. Null-sec players would have the advantage of not paying the empire tax and this again would follow the risk/reward scale (NPC null-sec and Low-sec would still have an additional tax, but it would be much lower than high-sec).

Sec status
Standings should be moved partly into the hands of players. Why should concord/empire decide the sec status of a capsuleer? If someone with blood on their hands goes to null-sec and rats for a week they are effectively ‘clean’ and can come back to high-sec with impunity.

Instead make 50% of the sec status as it is currently, but the other 50% under the control of players. So if I want to increase my sec status, I would have to get enough players (with high sec status) to vouch for me. This would also enliven the economy with a secondary market in selling sec status increases!

Secondary Markets
Allow the trading of derivatives (ie ice futures) and allow stops/puts/spread betting etc. Enhance the market so that is no longer just commodities - this will benefit all players.

Why the **** are you living in null then if you want hisec to be better? GTFO of my alliance.

Why are you biting the hand the feeds you?

My suggestion is to get a Hulk, set it up in a Highsec belt and just stay there. Why you are in my null is beyond me. EVE needs more harshness, not less.
I'm sure there is another MMO that would suit you better.

Get out.

NO!

/me Bitchslaps OP

There are just so many issues plaguing nulsec, and yet this "so called" alliance member of mine wants to coddle the carebears even more and removing any incentive to leave their pve world.
You're right about highsec play not really affecting my own game, but I feel that the focus of the CSM should be on null, and the problems facing the players there. After all, that's where the true spirit of EVE lies.

I agree, nullsec needs a of work. In, fact - ultimately I think the best thing FOR the carebears is to focus on nullsec ASAP, fix the sovereignty system and resource balancing, so that Alliances have enough to fight over out there that they don't have to resort to noob-punching to entertain themselves.

Wouldn't you agree that if nullsec were fixed and worth fighting over, that the epic wars and PvP that could rage once again throughout 0.0 space would be far more challenging and entertaining than taking the time to gank miners, new players, and those who just like to PvE?

The bottom line is, until nullsec exists as a fantastically satisfying and engaging experience for every single type of player that could ever log into EvE (which we both agree that it currently is not) there will always be players who choose to do something different to entertain themselves, I personally get no satisfaction from disrespecting those who have a different idea of fun than I do.

Those of us in Faction Warfare play to fight. To fight often and to fight challenging opponents in a variety of interesting ships, not to suicide industrials, or engage in mega-capital ship wars. We have no interest in the politics of nullsec, not because we don't think they belong (EvE wouldn't be the same without them!) but because they limit where and when we can go out and kill. For us, the spirit of EvE is the dogfight, the moment of battle itself, more than the steps it took by leadership to get there.

CCP is a business, a they have a large paying group of customers who just don't want to PvP. You and I may not understand why that is exactly, but they exist. Given that fact, CCP simply can't afford to lose all of them just because you or I think they should be forced to play the way we do. Nor should you or I be forced to enjoy the same type of PvP that the other does. This is the danger of the CSM being composed of members who favor development only for one playstyle - if nullsec interests are protected exclusively, CCP risks alienating all the customers who don't enjoy some of the more boring aspects of nullsec life.

You can laugh about me "crying to mommy', doesn't bother me one bit. :) I don't really think its childish to ask questions, and I honestly didn't understand the need to attack someone just for thinking about somebody other than himself. Thanks for taking the time to respond, at least now I understand where you're coming from.

Hans

Condensing the quote was not meant in an insulting manner. I only dislike the redundancy of quoting the whole of the previous post.
[/reasonable guy]

Now to business.

Carebears should appreciate what comes out of null for what it really is. Content.

In the past it has brought things like Jihad Swarm, Hulkageddon, random suicide campaigns in trade hubs, failcascades affecting thousands of players, fixing the tournament, organized and open market manipulation (remember oxygen isotopes?), taking the forums hostage to pressure CCP, manipulation of the game media to help pressure CCP into focusing development on spaceships, and much more.

In the same time frame CCP has come out with PI, and incursions. Cementing my impression of highsec play as a meaningless grind for ISK just to be able to buy a shinier ship to grind more ISK for an even shinier ship and so on ad nauseam.

When EVE is referred to in the game- and regular press it's nullsec shenanigans they show as defining the gameplay. Player driven stories. Newbies downloading the trial know this and should be prepared to assume the position when logging in. EVE rewards the intelligent and the crafty, and yes even sometimes the cruel.

I'm glad that the big null alliances can rally together the numbers to get coherent representation in the CSM, and I don't see OP's ideas in danger of getting any traction soon.

At the end of the day we impact your gameplay more than any other group, and you should all be thankful for it.

Gambling
Currently it is possible to have out of game gambling (Blink, Eve Hold-em). I propose that in-game gambling should be introduced - particularly in low-sec.

Quick-match events (1v1, 2v2 etc) fights in a 'Colosseum-style' area would allow casual players to pvp quickly and easily and would also facilitate gambling.

Matches would have to have different brackets (T1 frigates only, Faction Cruiser only etc). Although full FFA would also be an option.

Obviously you could gamble on the outcome of a fight, time to first kill (for larger fights) etc. Gambling would be controlled by the owners of the station and the house would keep a flat % of the isk gambled (another useful ISK sink).

This would help with three problems - differentiating low-sec, allowing quick-match events (a la LoL, WoT etc) and provide a different mechanism for keeping isk flowing between players. Of course, this being Eve, matches could be rigged by players who have alts/corp mates gambling on the outcome, and this would lead to more grudges and more fights.

People already proposed gambling as an 'Incarna/Establishments' feature, I don't see why we would need it to be defined as a WiS feature when it could just as easily be added now.

Ship balance for PvE
The proposed changes to the Drake are to make the ship more balanced for PvP - however many low sp pilots use Drakes for ratting/missions and reducing the tank will cause many players difficulties.

Since I started playing, Caldari were known as the PvE race, however this isn't entirely true. Caldari players get access to Drakes and Tengus for sure, but the battleships suck (compare Scorpion to Typhoon in terms of PvE utility).

Reducing the tank on the Drake will not allow Caldari players from running high end missions until they can get the required skills for a Tengu. The Raven and Tengu are too expensive for many players and these players are used to using the Drake until they earn enough isk.

Cross-training would be an option for some pilots, but many people RP and don't want to fly FOTM ships just for 'efficiency'.

In general ships should be balanced around PvP, but this change to the Drake has the following impacts:

• removes the tank from the foremost missioning/PvE ship
• removes the tank from the ship that is commonly used by junior FCs in shieldfleet doctrines
• makes Caldari ships less useful - and hence less people will skill into them

Enlivening the economy by rebalancing some ships is generally a good thing, I just think that the Scorpion and Black Ops ships should be looked at first (why is the Tier 1 Caldari ship ECM specialised, but the Tier 1 Armar/Minmatar/Gallente not equivalently EWAR specced?)

Reset TEST.