These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

High Security does not mean Perfect Security.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Verity Sovereign
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#41 - 2012-11-25 20:31:52 UTC
I assume consensual PvP would still be allowed? not just war decs, but also can flipping?

PvPing leads to inflation - resources destroyed, ISK injected.

Of course, if no resources are destroyed, they just pile up, and when people's hoarding is satisfied, there's no point to anything...

So the question is... what portion of ships and modules are destroyed due to non-consensual PvP in high sec (aka, suicide ganking) - I suspect very litte.

What we might see is the price of shiny stuff go up initially...
Everyone will want an all officer fit PvE boat for making ISK - If such fits were safe, we'd see more demand for them - the next question would be how many people will screw up and lose those officer fits to PvE content (more people flying them = more liekly some idiotic* action results in their destruction), vs how many people get ganked in HS with officer fits.

I don't actually think it would have a big impact on measurable parameters, beyond more shiny fits flying around in high sec (you might actually see ORE mining lasers and strip miners used...)
But it would eat away at the "soul" of the game.

Even if I don't seek out PvP in high sec... knowing that there are predators out there changes the feel of the game... when I've got shiny fits, I'm always looking out for groups of minmatar ships (mainly tornados, but anything that might be packing Arty) - it adds to the atmosphere of the game. (so If I do see a group, even if its too late to avoid them, I can preemptively overheat hardeners before their alpha strike)
- Even without the suicide ganks, it would still be more hardcore - even in PvE (like incursions), dumb stuff like the well known "Leeroy Jenkins" video hurts a lot- failure in PvE means alot more than you just have to retry the PvE content - it means you ship is dead, and about half your gear is gone and probably hard to recover (and may be stolen by other players).
It will still be "softer core"

Effect on game play in high sec: much more bling and demand for bling, possibly, years later, demand for bling drops off because everyone has bling, and they aren't losing it (though I suspect with wardecs, you'd still catch enough peoplewith bling to keep this from happening)

Effect on game atmosphere: huge, game seems less hardcore, PvE becomes more bland as that feeling about lurking predators (or just dicks, who will gank even if its not profitable) goes away, and PvE content becomes too easy with all the bling you can now put on your ship


*I was nearly such an idiot today. As the incursion fleet I wanted to fly with had a long waitlist, I took my shiny fit incursion nightmare and decided to run a lvl 4 mission - worlds collide - in hopes of getting a faction spawn... I just threw on my HQ level buffer+ resist tank, and gave it a go - no active rep, no mission specific hardeners, and my drones were set to passive for use with a drone bunny...
Went in the guristas room, got jammed, and full room aggro (without even firing a shot), 2 frigs were on me, scramming... drones did nothing... changed them to aggressive, but as i got no new aggro... they still did nothing... still wasn't able to lock, still scrammed, drones still idle... shields went down, down down, and I was jammed jammed jammed...
finally had sensors back on long enough to target a frig, send drones after it, then after the 2nd frig...

I had something like 108k EHP going into it... I left with 38% structure... that would have been painfully embarrassing...
Ritsum
Perkone
Caldari State
#42 - 2012-11-25 20:39:26 UTC
Police are not perfect. With retribution players will be more of police then concord will be... Concord will just be there to punish the stupid then.

Play EvE how you want to play it and do not let others dictate how you play. Evolve your playstyle to protect yourself from others! Even in "PVE", "PVP" is there, lurking in the shadows.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#43 - 2012-11-25 20:44:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
YoYo NickyYo wrote:
Seriously Tippia, you can't read a graph?
I can read them just fine.

So fine, in fact, that I can't help noticing that they measure (in the short term) number of characters online or (in the longer term) average characters online. Among the stuff not measured are things like players and their status.
Mars Theran
Foreign Interloper
#44 - 2012-11-25 21:15:19 UTC
You'd be surprised at how much is lost in Highsec to Suicide ganking and Wars I think. Just consider for a moment, that the largest concentration of ship kills is currently in Empire, and then, that ganker ships are destroyed in the process of suicide ganking.

Freighter gank = ~30 Tornado's, One Freighter, plus any destroyed cargo and modules = ~3.1 billion to any possible amount that can fit in the hold of that freighter plus all modules and cargo on involved ships. Minimum, about a 3 billion ISK, (based on market), loss.

I'm basing that entirely on the fact that I've heard from various sources that it takes ~30 Tornados to guarantee a gank on a Freighter.

Hulks run ~ 150 million plus mods.

My last BS loss in Jita was a Hyperion and netted about 290 million for modules and ship. I built it myself, so the real loss there was the minerals taken off the market to make it and the modules someone else put on the market which I bought and fit it with.

Recently, I'd say that a large portion of these losses has been in Highsec. Either way, I don't want to see Highsec any safer than it currently is or will be or not be in Retribution. This as a player who doesn't Pirate or gank and never has.
zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub
Nerf Burger
Doomheim
#45 - 2012-11-25 21:54:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Nerf Burger
Tippia wrote:
Nerf Burger wrote:
what a foolish thing to say.
Not really, no.

It's a PvP game with two core components — industry and warfare — feeding each other and interacting through a competitive market. Remove one part and the rest become meaningless, and then the game falls apart.



EVE would fall apart if empire were perfectly safe? Lol


Get off the forums and get a grip. You aren't living in reality. There are plenty of succesful pvp games that have areas of perfect safety.

Its amazing how bent out of shape the cowardly high--sec "pvpers" get when their riskless/brainless "pvp" is threatened and put under the microscope.e Its about time EVE stopped being a haven for cowards who pvp under the protection of concord.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#46 - 2012-11-25 22:26:54 UTC
Nerf Burger wrote:
Get off the forums and get a grip. You aren't living in reality. There are plenty of succesful pvp games that have areas of perfect safety.


Go play one of those games then.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Renan Ruivo
Forcas armadas
Brave Collective
#47 - 2012-11-25 22:44:56 UTC
While we're at it.

What if we replaced all weapons with nerf guns and rainbow-makers and everybody formed CTA's and Major OP's to sing motivational and kid-friendly songs together instead of killing each other?

The world is a community of idiots doing a series of things until it explodes and we all die.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#48 - 2012-11-25 22:54:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
Nerf Burger wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Nerf Burger wrote:
what a foolish thing to say.
Not really, no.

It's a PvP game with two core components — industry and warfare — feeding each other and interacting through a competitive market. Remove one part and the rest become meaningless, and then the game falls apart.



EVE would fall apart if empire were perfectly safe? Lol


Get off the forums and get a grip. You aren't living in reality. There are plenty of succesful pvp games that have areas of perfect safety.

Its amazing how bent out of shape the cowardly high--sec "pvpers" get when their riskless/brainless "pvp" is threatened and put under the microscope.e Its about time EVE stopped being a haven for cowards who pvp under the protection of concord.

Yea, we need far more E-Honour. That'll mean if high sec went perfectly safe, Eve would survive for sure.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Qin Tawate
Doomheim
#49 - 2012-11-25 22:57:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Qin Tawate
Samanna Aries wrote:
I see the statement made that "hi sec is not perfect sec" quite often.

What if hi sec were perfectly secure?

I mean no pvp of any type and you were completely unable to harm another player while in hi sec unless there was an active war between your corps.

What would the consequences be? Would it impact the players who live out in Null Sec to any significant degree? Would it impact the players who practice piracy in low sec?

I know it would have consequences for those who like to gank miners and freighters etc in hi sec but what other changes would occur?

I am asking this because I want to know, not because I think this is how it should be. I am curious and looking for an answer.



well, all the really bad PVPers like most Goons would lose a big pool of victims/source of killmails and income, who do not intend to PVP, because htey fly ships like freighters, which can not shoot back.

That is why they can not allow you to ask this question, why high sec should be not High Sec.

They need High Sec to have at least some success in PVP. Their other method against their inferiority complex in PVP is blob. They feel, they are too weak alone, so they bring lots of mates. They did that very successful in 0.0. It is now boring there most of the time. So they come in High Sec and do their method in a more extreme way. PVP blob vs ships, which do not shoot back.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#50 - 2012-11-25 23:09:08 UTC
Qin Tawate wrote:
That is why they can not allow you to ask this question, why high sec should be not High Sec.

Actually high sec is in fact, high sec. What it isn't, is perfect sec. Blink

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Qin Tawate
Doomheim
#51 - 2012-11-25 23:17:45 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Qin Tawate wrote:
That is why they can not allow you to ask this question, why high sec should be not High Sec.

Actually high sec is in fact, high sec. What it isn't, is perfect sec. Blink


it is often less High Sec than Low sec or 0.0 sec, if you fly in something that is worth to be sucide ganked or if they have another reason to suicide gank. That is, what suicide gankers live off since many years. Bad documentation of how much security there really is in High Sec. Not much. The KI, which should protect High Sec is too dumb and not effective. Now CCP could program a more complicated, smarter KI for Concord or just try to make it real High Sec.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#52 - 2012-11-25 23:22:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Nerf Burger wrote:
EVE would fall apart if empire were perfectly safe?
Yes. The removal of one (or even two) cornerstones of the game, and hampering conflict on the thid, all in a PvP-centric game, would indeed break the game.

Without destruction, industry serves no purpose. Without industry, the market serves no purpose. Without market, nothing else in the game serves no purpose. Remove danger from highsec and you mighst as well remove highsec completely and just NPC-seed it since it will have the same effect (and make the game ridiculously flat and dull).

Quote:
There are plenty of succesful pvp games that have areas of perfect safety.
…and in those areas, nothing related to the PvP goes on. In EVE, that would mean that all you could do is spin your ship.

Qin Tawate wrote:
That is why they can not allow you to ask this question, why high sec should be not High Sec.
Fun fact: highsec is high sec. No-one is saying that it isn't or shouldn't be. It's just that “high” ≠ “total”. On a scale from 0 to 10, 2 is high compared to 1 and 0.

Quote:
it is often less High Sec than Low sec or 0.0 sec, if you fly in something that is worth to be sucide ganked or if they have another reason to suicide gank.
No. If you fly something that valuable in highsec, you may get ganked, but the odds are lower than in low or nullsec, where there are no repercussions for it. So at worst, you're slightly safer than in lowsec… and that's before we look at what happens if you don't even have that nice loot to share.

Highsec is “real” highsec: it offers higher base security than low and null.
Qin Tawate
Doomheim
#53 - 2012-11-25 23:27:27 UTC
Tippia wrote:
lots of yadayada as always


Let me put it this way: High Sec is simply miss-labeled. What you try to say, that a corner stone would fall and the world end on 21.12, if CCP relabel and re-work the system, who cares?
Nerf Burger
Doomheim
#54 - 2012-11-25 23:34:13 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Eterne
Tippia wrote:

Without destruction, industry serves no purpose. Without industry, the market serves no purpose. Without market, nothing else


you are act as if there would be no destruction if high sec were perfectly safe.

Removed personal attacks - CCP Eterne
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#55 - 2012-11-25 23:46:00 UTC
Qin Tawate wrote:
Let me put it this way: High Sec is simply miss-labeled.
How so? It offers a high level of security, after all.

Nerf Burger wrote:
you are act as if there would be no destruction if high sec were perfectly safe.
No. I act as if an area where destruction wasn't allowed would instantly collect all activities that anyone would want to keep protected, thereby removing vast amounts of gameplay (both in terms of supply and demand).

I'm also acting as disallowing players to do what they want to each other in a multiplayer sandbox makes it a singleplayer sandbox, which means it's no longer the same game. Again, X³ springs to mind if that's the kind of game you want.
Jack Miton
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#56 - 2012-11-26 00:07:10 UTC
Terrible idea is terrible.

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout
Ocih
Space Mermaids
#57 - 2012-11-26 00:56:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Ocih
Mars Theran wrote:
You'd be surprised at how much is lost in Highsec to Suicide ganking and Wars I think. Just consider for a moment, that the largest concentration of ship kills is currently in Empire, and then, that ganker ships are destroyed in the process of suicide ganking.

Freighter gank = ~30 Tornado's, One Freighter, plus any destroyed cargo and modules = ~3.1 billion to any possible amount that can fit in the hold of that freighter plus all modules and cargo on involved ships. Minimum, about a 3 billion ISK, (based on market), loss.

I'm basing that entirely on the fact that I've heard from various sources that it takes ~30 Tornados to guarantee a gank on a Freighter.

Hulks run ~ 150 million plus mods.

My last BS loss in Jita was a Hyperion and netted about 290 million for modules and ship. I built it myself, so the real loss there was the minerals taken off the market to make it and the modules someone else put on the market which I bought and fit it with.

Recently, I'd say that a large portion of these losses has been in Highsec. Either way, I don't want to see Highsec any safer than it currently is or will be or not be in Retribution. This as a player who doesn't Pirate or gank and never has.


Not quite on the freighter gank. It's possible you are forced to use Nad's in .9 or 1.0 for the higher instant crack of the whip but in .5 it's Talos and they only need 7 or 8.

As tot he topic, EVE has a holy duality where others have a holy trinity. Gank beats tank and in reality if Goons wanted to they could do a freighter gank in HS with 2000 rifters. There is just no way to stop over kill dps.
Seven Noctis
#58 - 2012-11-26 00:57:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Seven Noctis
Tippia wrote:
I'm also acting as disallowing players to do what they want to each other in a multiplayer sandbox makes it a singleplayer sandbox, which means it's no longer the same game. Again, X³ springs to mind if that's the kind of game you want.

Frankly, EVE Hi-Sec is bordering on being an SP sandbox as it is. Restrictions are rather strict compared to true open PvP games, where the players really do make the game (ok, have a relatively greater impact on it, if you will).

If Hi-Sec were made even safer and more restricted, I imagine the player base would take quite a hit as that would not be what many of us signed up for. Shift in the balance towards a less restricted environment would likely have same results for same reasons, on the other hand.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#59 - 2012-11-26 04:16:28 UTC
Seven Noctis wrote:
Tippia wrote:
I'm also acting as disallowing players to do what they want to each other in a multiplayer sandbox makes it a singleplayer sandbox, which means it's no longer the same game. Again, X³ springs to mind if that's the kind of game you want.

Frankly, EVE Hi-Sec is bordering on being an SP sandbox as it is. Restrictions are rather strict compared to true open PvP games, where the players really do make the game (ok, have a relatively greater impact on it, if you will).

If Hi-Sec were made even safer and more restricted, I imagine the player base would take quite a hit as that would not be what many of us signed up for. Shift in the balance towards a less restricted environment would likely have same results for same reasons, on the other hand.

On the contrary, if it isn't made safer and more restricted (in terms of evil ganking and bumping), EVE will die, according to General Discussion.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#60 - 2012-11-26 05:08:14 UTC
Val'Dore wrote:
I'm all for perfect hi sec.

But here are the caveats:

1. NPCs are included in the cease fire, no belt rats, no incursions, no missions in high sec.

2. Asteroids and Ice Belts are also included in the ceasefire, shooting lasers at a rock and eating it like a jar of peanut butter is as hostile as it gets.

3. The only high slot module that can be activated in High Sec will be snowball launchers.


And here it is, the perfect answer to the high sec "question". Sure, we'll support perfect safety IF and ONLY IF peopel in high sec can do nothing what-so-ever that has a negative imact on anyone else.

The OP can play it off as "just asking a question", but the truth is that is what too many misguided high-sec only players really want. Good thing is it will never happen as long as one anti-social Icelander remains with ccp.