These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

What is the real problem people have with High Sec?

Author
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#61 - 2012-10-18 09:01:30 UTC
I think the problem is that many other parts of the game are broken and lack content. People wouldn't care about guys in HS if there were more interesting things to do in low/null.
Prince Kobol
#62 - 2012-10-18 09:08:41 UTC
Personally the only nerf to HS I would make is to increase manufacturing costs and introduce some sort of Concord Payment if you have a PoS anchored, similar to Sov bills.

What really needs to happen is for CCP to sort null out.

A big problem is people who have never lived in null sec scream how much isk you can make there when in reality for most people it is difficult.

I know personally I can earn more isk in HS with great ease then I could do in null sec which for me is wrong.

Its the whole reward v risk debate.

HS = lots of reward with next to no risk

Null sec = little reward with lots of risk

For me this is the wrong way round.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#63 - 2012-10-18 09:12:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
TheSkeptic wrote:
The issue also lies around how the statistics are gathered. When they say 80% of the population lives in hi-sec, is that 80% of characters or players?
It's characters, and it's 65%.

…so it's very easy to imagine that the percentage of highsec players is somewhere in the 30% range.



And the problem with highsec is rather simple: too much of everything for ε investment, cost, risk, and upkeep, making other parts of space completely redundant. If people want to live there, that's fine. If there is no reason to leave because it would be downright stupid to do so because you lose massive benefits and gain very little for doing so, then we have a problem.
Amateratsu
The Pegasus Project
#64 - 2012-10-18 09:50:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Amateratsu
The so called hardcore pvp players rant on and on that EvE is supossed to be a cold dark unforgiving place.
Tho that may be what CCP originally intended the game to be, Eve has changed comciderably in the last 9 years.

The number of players has continued to grow into the 100's of Thousands. and the Devs MUST adapt their vision of EvE to suit EvE's playerbase as a whole.

Continuously nerfing high sec will only drive those players or enjoy a safer more casual gamplay out of the game, and this
would be bad for ccp's bank balance and the continued growth and future of EvE Online.

Everyone has a right to play EvE as they see fit and to enjoy their own playstyle. nerfing 1 playstyle in favor of another is not the answer. and will not do any good for EvE or CCP in the long term.

Instead. They should be buffing Lo / Null sec and adding more content to make Lo and Null more attractive.

A lot of the people ranting about high sec are selfish players who believe everyone must play EvE the same as they do or get the f** out. if that happens where is the free sandbox then?

PVP is not all about blowing up spaceships, every aspect of EvE from trading to manurfactoring to competing for resources is Player Vs Player.

High Sec is fine, Buff lo / Null sec, remove gatecamps, choke points, blobing and maybe more players will venture out there for the better rewards when they know they are not instantly going to get ganked the moment they jump into a lo sec system.
Tao Dolcino
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#65 - 2012-10-18 09:59:18 UTC
Amateratsu wrote:
EvE's playerbase as a hole


*whispers* i suppose you meant as a whole Blink
Jim Hazard
Fury Industry
#66 - 2012-10-18 10:24:16 UTC
Amateratsu wrote:
The so called hardcore pvp players rant on and on that EvE is supossed to be a cold dark unforgiving place.
Tho that may be what CCP originally intended the game to be, Eve has changed comciderably in the last 9 years.

The number of players has continued to grow into the 100's of Thousands. and the Devs MUST adapt their vision of EvE to suit EvE's playerbase as a whole.

Continuously nerfing high sec will only drive those players or enjoy a safer more casual gamplay out of the game, and this
would be bad for ccp's bank balance and the continued growth and future of EvE Online.

Everyone has a right to play EvE as they see fit and to enjoy their own playstyle. nerfing 1 playstyle in favor of another is not the answer. and will not do any good for EvE or CCP in the long term.

Instead. They should be buffing Lo / Null sec and adding more content to make Lo and Null more attractive.

A lot of the people ranting about high sec are selfish players who believe everyone must play EvE the same as they do or get the f** out. if that happens where is the free sandbox then?

PVP is not all about blowing up spaceships, every aspect of EvE from trading to manurfactoring to competing for resources is Player Vs Player.

High Sec is fine, Buff lo / Null sec, remove gatecamps, choke points, blobing and maybe more players will venture out there for the better rewards when they know they are not instantly going to get ganked the moment they jump into a lo sec system.


First of all... It is Amaterasu and not Amateratsu...

Also the people in 0.0 are not saying that people in high sec should not enjoy their PvE content, it should just should not be as rewarding as it is. Take me for example... I only undock in 0.0 to PvP, but have 5 chars making ISK in high sec, because its not worth doing it in 0.0 as the rewards are not in line with the much higher effort especially logistics wise.

Nerfing high sec in my opinion makes more sense for the following reasons:

1. We already have huge ISK faucets in the game and buffing 0.0 would most likely mean increasing the amount of money that gets created out of thin air.
2. Making money in general is too easy if losing faction battleships and tengus is nbd and while buffing 0.0 income might attract a few more people to go out there, it makes losses even more meaningless if you can even make a lot more money again. (The balance of high and low/null income on a individual member basis is broken)
3. Nerfing high sec ISK faucets would reduce the problem with inflation.
4. High Sec, no matter if you are an industrialist or Soldier, should be the area where you learn how to play the game and not the area where you happily grind in safety forever and can be as effective as people who take the risk to move out to 0.0



Amateratsu
The Pegasus Project
#67 - 2012-10-18 10:52:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Amateratsu
Jim Hazard wrote:


First of all... It is Amaterasu and not Amateratsu...

Also the people in 0.0 are not saying that people in high sec should not enjoy their PvE content, it should just should not be as rewarding as it is. Take me for example... I only undock in 0.0 to PvP, but have 5 chars making ISK in high sec, because its not worth doing it in 0.0 as the rewards are not in line with the much higher effort especially logistics wise.

Nerfing high sec in my opinion makes more sense for the following reasons:

1. We already have huge ISK faucets in the game and buffing 0.0 would most likely mean increasing the amount of money that gets created out of thin air.
2. Making money in general is too easy if losing faction battleships and tengus is nbd and while buffing 0.0 income might attract a few more people to go out there, it makes losses even more meaningless if you can even make a lot more money again. (The balance of high and low/null income on a individual member basis is broken)
3. Nerfing high sec ISK faucets would reduce the problem with inflation.
4. High Sec, no matter if you are an industrialist or Soldier, should be the area where you learn how to play the game and not the area where you happily grind in safety forever and can be as effective as people who take the risk to move out to 0.0


Yeah I know it should be Amaterasu, Unfortunately it's 7 years to late for me to correct the spelling of my nameBig smile

You said it yourself, "it's not worth doing it in 0.0, so that is imo what needs fixing.

Constantly nerfing highsec will only drive players out of the game. they won't move to low/null because as you said there is too much risk for too little reward.

And why does highsec have to be a staging area to learn the game before moving out? I only have time to play eve for a few hours a week, (RL Full time Job ect) I play casually in hi sec, why do i have to move out?
Jim Hazard
Fury Industry
#68 - 2012-10-18 11:04:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Jim Hazard
Amateratsu wrote:
Jim Hazard wrote:


First of all... It is Amaterasu and not Amateratsu...

Also the people in 0.0 are not saying that people in high sec should not enjoy their PvE content, it should just should not be as rewarding as it is. Take me for example... I only undock in 0.0 to PvP, but have 5 chars making ISK in high sec, because its not worth doing it in 0.0 as the rewards are not in line with the much higher effort especially logistics wise.

Nerfing high sec in my opinion makes more sense for the following reasons:

1. We already have huge ISK faucets in the game and buffing 0.0 would most likely mean increasing the amount of money that gets created out of thin air.
2. Making money in general is too easy if losing faction battleships and tengus is nbd and while buffing 0.0 income might attract a few more people to go out there, it makes losses even more meaningless if you can even make a lot more money again. (The balance of high and low/null income on a individual member basis is broken)
3. Nerfing high sec ISK faucets would reduce the problem with inflation.
4. High Sec, no matter if you are an industrialist or Soldier, should be the area where you learn how to play the game and not the area where you happily grind in safety forever and can be as effective as people who take the risk to move out to 0.0




Amateratsu wrote:

You said it yourself, "it's not worth doing it in 0.0, so that is imo what needs fixing.


I am not saying that there are no ways to make more than enough money in 0.0. All i am saying is that the extra effort compared to high sec is not worth it.

Amateratsu wrote:


Constantly nerfing highsec will only drive players out of the game. they won't move to low/null because as you said there is too much risk for too little reward.



Most likely only the ones who are leaving are the ones who only play to plex their chars anyway, so all in all if those leave it is not a loss for the game at all, since they really add nothing to the game or the community.

Amateratsu wrote:


And why does highsec have to be a staging area to learn the game before moving out? I only have time to play eve for a few hours a week, (RL Full time Job ect) I play casually in hi sec, why do i have to move out?


You do not have to, but if you refuse to do so you should not be able to make billions without any risk.

High sec never should have been that profitable in the first place
Inquisitor Kitchner
The Executives
#69 - 2012-10-18 11:35:06 UTC
Davis TetrisKing wrote:


Can people make more ISK/hour than you think they should (L4s etc)?


Yes. There is no activity that should make you more isk in High Sec then anywhere else, in fact High Sec activities shouldn't make the same or nearly the same isk as Low/Null as those activities need to account for ship losses.

Quote:
Do people think that semi-afk mining is an issue as it potentially drives mineral prices down?


AFK Mining isn't an issue as long as you can't make massive amounts of money doing it compared to someone sitting at their PC/Laptop.

As long as 6 hours afk mining doesn't make more isk then 3 hours actually playing the same then that's fine. (Number of horus there just chosen at random, but you get my point)

Quote:
Do people want more targets to shoot in low/null/WH?


Yes, but this will only happen when more people live there rather then just PvPing there.

Quote:
Should no-one in eve be allowed to play in a relatively risk free (from a ship getting blown up standpoint) environment?


No, I think if you want to play in a risk free environment in EVE thats OK, you just shouldn't be able to earn the same amount of money.

Example:

Player A & Player B are both saving to buy themselves a Paladin.

Player A does his isk making in 0.0
Player B does his isk making in High Sec

Player A should easily be able to get the Paladin before Player B

That doesn't mean Player B shouldn't be able to eventually get one, it should just take much longer.

Quote:
Do people feel that if something can be done in High-Sec there is no point even bothering to do that activity in Low/Null/WH? (and also is this inherently a bad thing?)


Depending on the output of the activity, not the activity itself. If you can mine Veldspar in High Sec and make the same amount as Mining it in Null Sec, why would you expose yourself to risk for no reason?

There's no problem with being able to run challenging missions in High, Low and Null, you should just make more money in Low and then Null then in High.

"If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared." - Niccolo Machiavelli

Darth Khasei
Wavestar Business Ventures Inc.
#70 - 2012-10-18 11:39:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Darth Khasei
Respect. Cool

I think that CCP deciding what rewards and risks the game should have is infinitely better than any individual player due to the inherent bias each person has.
Ptraci
3 R Corporation
#71 - 2012-10-18 11:49:32 UTC
High sec is a horrible place full of filthy neutrals.
Aedh Phelan
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#72 - 2012-10-18 12:25:11 UTC
As a nobody spouting nonsense about nothing...

I do agree that there are a lot of disincentives to low and null security space that encourage many players to stay out. I also don't think merely buffing one or nerfing the other would make an impact other than to cause unsubs. It seems to me that some paradigm shifts in the way Eden is structured would need to occur. Even then, there will always be those that won't go under any circumstance. Admittedly, my own experience traversing <0.5 is probably less than 100 times.

Hi-sec space has some form of law, a restraining force that imposes some behavior adjustment on the society. Criminal activity still exists and should exist. Utopia would be utterly boring. Still, in the places in Eden that are under a civilized form of protection, citizens can go about their lives making a decent living even though adrenaline rushes are few and far between.

Where the presence of law is diminished or non-existent, life would be a struggle, survival is a matter of being smarter stronger faster than the other guy....always...in a "Game of Clones" this gets a little fuzzy. These reaches of space attract Davy Croketts, Jesse James, Billy the Kid, Bluebeard, Lewis and Clark, Alexander, Napoleon, Attilla the Hun, Ceasar etc. that can't or won't live under the confines of the imposed civilized society. These people scrape, scratch and claw for power and discovery in places civilization is afraid to go. It is a hard and constant struggle.

But it sounds like other than the ability to brag about dominance over chunks of space and a few resources there is very little to differentiate hi-sec from lo/null-sec other than the whole imminent death thing.

So, at the bottom of the wall of text... I've seen the same ideas over and over get mentioned and then trolled to ashes. We need new ones that change the way some things work without breaking that bit of terror you feel when you do somethng you know is filled with unknown and seriously dangerous.

These might not be new but...
1. I'm nervous but rarely am scared flying around in space once I get past the gate. But that damn gate keeps me out most of the time. I use a character I don't care about as a scout if I can't get help but think it's a little cowardly. Others might not want or have the ability to do that. So how do we get me past the gate? It can't be just PvP, or because the lvl 4's are there or bigger cooler rocks or even cheaper indy fees (they would be more expensive and rare in lawless space, sorry).

And I'm stopping with the one stupid point since anyone with any sense stopped reading long ago Ugh.
Anslo
Scope Works
#73 - 2012-10-18 12:29:52 UTC
Just jealousy.

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]

Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#74 - 2012-10-18 12:54:40 UTC
Alexa Coates wrote:
the real problem is all the assholes in low/null chased everyone out so now they're whining and crying to have everyone forced into low/null so they can shoot them.


^^ THIS

Nothing can be done in Low, without being at least stalked.

Oh, and after they use Focused Interdiction on your Bustard that hangs 4 Warp Stabs (giving it +6 Warp protection) they will still bring 8 ships to pop it just for the KillMail buff.

Force KM's to only report who Laid the Final Blow.

That should stop the 'easy as popping a Mack in High Sec' LowBears.

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882

Vigilant
Vigilant's Vigilante's
#75 - 2012-10-18 13:59:32 UTC
The issue for many is time. I get maybe 2 to 3 hours a night to play.
So, enough to manufacture, check PI, run a few missions or
Mine a bit.

I do not have the time to wait for fleets to form up or the patience
to deal with alliance politics.

Casual players live in high sec, go figure.

0.0 players complain about high sec isk generation
but are sitting on a gold mine 23/7. Sure logistics is pain in the
ass, but the money is there to be farmed. And most I know
have the time to do so.

Balancing this system to make all happy is near impossible.
CCP needs everyone basically pissed off to keep subs flowing
or they will loose subs and then Eve ends.
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#76 - 2012-10-18 14:02:01 UTC
High sec is boring. Also it shouldn't have ice fields at all.
Praxis Ginimic
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#77 - 2012-10-18 14:02:52 UTC
pussnheels wrote:
Davis TetrisKing wrote:
Praxis Ginimic wrote:
High sec is necessary but I would love to see it choked off. One small region for each empire would be perfect.


Interesting idea. Would need to have a huge need to travel between regions (forgive me if there already is one but for casual people like me I generally play within the one area fine) otherwise it might just form 4 little 'islands'.

i don't think it is a good idea , the maintrade routes between the major hubs already have choke points where enterprising people can make a small fortune ganking freighters ,
making those chokepoints low sec will have a serious negative impact on several economic sopurces


Yes, exactlt that. Empire space should be a small, crowded island of festering city-scape. Filled with emmigratns who are just trying to escape the din of un-ending war and dwindling resources, land and available wealth planet-side. This would crreate much the same in empire space. The ONLY way to make anything for yourself should be to venture out into the resource-rich wilds and colonize. "Go west young man, go west"

I do realize that the opposite is true right now. The empires are large populated cities with massive amount of available resources and facilities. If they were small and over crowded then people would be forced into the vast expanse of low-sec to mine/manufacture/explore. Even that should be small potatoes to what is available in the outer regions of 0.0.

There SHOULD be huge risk in transporting your goods between regions. Also, there shouldn't be a need to go from empire to empire to sell your goods. We could ALL subsist with out the security. Simply doing away with ALL of high sec that isn't specifically a training ground would ensure that the new players wouldn't miss it in the first place.

BTW, I'm a pretty casual player. I'm not afraid of losing my stuff either. these are pretend space ships and pretend resources. Lets not forget that.
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
#78 - 2012-10-18 14:14:32 UTC
Davis TetrisKing wrote:
Praxis Ginimic wrote:
High sec is necessary but I would love to see it choked off. One small region for each empire would be perfect.


Interesting idea. Would need to have a huge need to travel between regions (forgive me if there already is one but for casual people like me I generally play within the one area fine) otherwise it might just form 4 little 'islands'.


Do this & you'd quickly find 4 Jitas. The Hi Sec Islands would in many ways almost act like 4 shards on the server. Its been suggested before.
TBH the hatred for HI SEC is mostly from the whiney lame wolves whom want easier fatter sheep for the slaughter... all too often their ideas just boil down to move everything profitable into NULL SEC will drive all HI SECCCers into lo/null when in actuality it'll just drive them out of the game tottally when they see thier clean sandbox turn intoo a dirtier cruddier sandbax fillled with turds and stinks to high heaven. Roll
An' then Chicken@little.com, he come scramblin outta the    Terminal room screaming "The system's crashing! The system's    crashing!" -Uncle RAMus, 'Tales for Cyberpsychotic Children'
Jim Era
#79 - 2012-10-18 14:20:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Jim Era
I am glad I moved back to hi-sec.
It is not risk free, I have had people bother me. It certainly is much more dangerous than when I was living in 0.0
But I am able to make so much more ISK in high than I was in null.

Wat™

Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#80 - 2012-10-18 14:35:58 UTC
It's like they imagine or fear that there will never ever ever ever be new players getting involved in Low and Null and it is dying....or something.....and that a shortage of PvP is brewing.......or something.

Curious, the passion that drives this attitude of wanting all to behave and play the same exact way.

Sounds more like the mindset of religious fanatics more than anything else.

It's a weird attitude I have found nowhere else in my 47 years BUT in Eve (excepting fascistic dictatorships and theocracies, but that's a whole other thread).

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882