Jita Park Speakers Corner

Lowsec and 0.0 suck... so the answer is to make Highsec suck also? Bring the whole game down to the lowest level or just move a part of Highsec that works to 0.0?

Absolutely I am cherry picking, because I keep hearing the something from different candidate. A lot of ideas… some that sound very good… and then a ‘if all else fails’ Nerf Highsec statement. A fallback position.

Where does your allegiance lie? With improving the game as a whole or just improving 0.0?

The players as a group disagree. Malcanis has stated that a very large majority of players are in Highsec. Highsec is alive and well (alright not as sick)… it is 0.0 and lowsec that are ill and dying. They need radical change. Consider this proposal that Malcanis thought was interesting in concept. (Not my idea).

---

For example (very roughly):



• In a 0.1 system there might not be any station/gate guns, but bubbles would not be anchorable.
• In a 0.2 system there would be station guns but no gate guns.
• In a 0.3 system there would be both station guns and gate guns, but they would not be as powerful as those in a 0.4
• In a 0.4 system there would be more powerful station guns and gate guns, and there would be a small chance of faction navy or pirate navy NPCs spawning when a criminal act takes place
• In a 0.5 system the faction navy (rather than Concord) would respond in force to criminal acts - sufficiently prepared ships could tank or avoid them for a short period, but would eventually be overwhelmed (the navy might call in Concord reinforcements if they were unable to handle the situation). All hi-sec systems would have powerful gate and station guns.
• In a 0.6 system Concord would respond to criminal acts, but their response time would be slower than in higher security systems.
• In a 0.7 system the Concord response time would be quicker, and there would be a very small chance of faction navy patrols appearing at gates and stations (tankable/avoidable if prepared).
• In a 0.8 system the Concord response time would be quicker and in greater numbers, and there would be a small to medium chance of faction navy patrols at gates and stations (still tankable/avoidable).
• In a 0.9 system the Concord response time would be quicker still, and there would be a medium to high chance of faction navy patrolling gates and stations, and a small chance of them patrolling asteroid belts.
• In a 1.0 system the Concord response would be almost instant, there would be constant faction navy patrols at stations and gates, and there would be a good chance of the navy patrolling the belts too.


Moving from a 1.0 system to a 0.5 system (or a 0.4 system to a 0.1 system) would involve a noticable drop in security, and would be accompanied by a comparable increase in potential reward for those willing to deal with the increased risk.

---

This would bring dynamic change to both High and Low sec. Huge game play opportunities. 0.0 needs something along these lines.


PS. If highsec industry gets nurfed… it really won’t affect me very much: I am not an industrialist. But it won’t really help 0.0… it is less than a band aid. Some 0.0 industrials will be happy, but Highsec will still be the place to be.

As a hiseccer, I oppose to be delivered second rate low/null gameplay as "more interesting content". FAI, Malcanis suggestion for missions is completely ignorant of hisec: he suggests to add the risk of PvP to Lvl5 missions, whereas the risk of PvP is what keeps hisec mission runners away from Lvl 5 missions.

Talk about finding the wrong problem, apply the wrong solution and call it an "improvement" to hisec before moving to what really matters to all of you, nullsec. And failing that, then nerf hisec, as if hisec wasn't costing enough players to CCP.

That's why endgame content exists. It takes long to get tired of it, and can be updated at a comfy place (well, not so comfy, provided how long willt ake to sort POs and Sov and ring minign and whatever else)

Hisec can't probably last longer than a year to any semi-casual palyer not burning stages through it. Then the hiseccer will hit a glass ceiling and notice there is nothing else and he should have been playing another game the whole time, because what 80% of what characters do is not important enough for CCP compared to the little minority that supplies !!headlines!!.

There are many ways to add content to hisec. FAI, let's say they redesign warpgates and let players "build" the new ones through little "shares" -players submit matherials and run the machineries building the new gate; once the new gate is done, the old one is demolished in a storm of destruction and the builders move onto another project. Building a gate maybe would take weeks and every player contributing it would be attached to the sections he made. Watching the structure grow would provide an incentive to keep login in, and having the name attached to it forever (well, almost) would also make feel the player like he was a part of the game.

Nothing would change to null or low. But all in a sudden a new breed of players would be born, the cathedral -errr, warpgate- builders. Once warpgates were done, stations could follow (maybe with a bonus for rebuilding Jtia IV-4 in as short time as possible)

Oh, and also this kind of "NPC building" would remove any desirable amount of minerals from the market. Make a gate require 10x the tritanium of a Ttian, FAI. Also, "Empires" (=CCP) issuing construction plans would dynamize sectors by creating temporary hubs for minerals and construction matherials. Populations would follow and with them predators (did i say that...?)

I would not do it as i'm not that kind of player and I dislike industry, but i think it's clear that there is potential for endgame hisec content... if you and CCP just remove the shackles that bind you to nullsec and lowsec and shooting red crosses as the alpha and omega of EVE.

I aim at high level content because it is non-existant for hiseccers. So far the concept has been to drive hiseccers out of hisec, but that's an utter failure. Hiseccers get out of hisec and out of the game.

Hisec, even capped as it is, provides the most casual-friendly content in EVE. In hisec, you can accomplish things in an hour. Traveling in hisec is second fastest in game (fastest being nullsec's jumpbridges, that monument to well balanced risk/reward), and this means less wasted time "going there" than lowsec and its securirty procedures, aka waste your bloody time to not waste your bloody ship. Missions in hisec are less prone to be interrumped or aborted by PvP; mining is more profitable due to simpler procedures (again, no security procedures = more time mining = more ISK/hour); and so and so.

Everything is faster in hisec, but also is capped because you're not supposed to be in hisec unless you're a noob or a grinder alt for some "real" player doing the "cool" endgame in nullsec, WH or lowsec. Adn that's a design decission, not something the players chose or created.

Let's face it, hisec is the most used space in the game, but it is not conceived to keep players going on for long. And so it works at nominal proficency, as players don't go on for long in hisec, rather they quit instead.

We can't tell for sure without the new human-tracking tools that are being implemented by CCP Segaull's minions, but my experience as a hiseccer is of people going out of the game, not into the "cool" rest of the game.

Do they quite because there is no "cool gameplay" in hisec, or because the existing "cool gameplay" is not what they want/need? I give hiseccers the bare brains needed to go looking for "cool gameplay" where it is, if they wanted it/could afford it...

Including the adjustment for mercoxit, the most lucrative null sec grav site is the large grav site that requires industry index of 3.

Currently this grav site is worth 191.9 isk/m3 at today's prices, in comparison scordite is worth 220.23 isk/m3.
Even if we factor in the difference between orca and rorqual bonuses, the price difference between the large grav site and scordite is greater than the difference in cycle time between the two boosts. The difference in boosts being 14.5%, and the difference in isk/m3 being almost 15%.

That means, that point blank, before all other considerations high sec mining is more lucrative than null sec mining.
What are your initial thoughts on this?

What's fun is that there are no hiseccers talking about how or why to reform hisec, as most hiseccers leave the game rather than learn to bang their head on the walls. Only non-hiseccers talk about hisec, and that taints the debate in many levels.

For an instance, what is "reward"? Maybe you noticed how I didn't explained what was the reward for bulding NPC structures... as there would not be any reward. Players wouldn't get a single ISK in return. The "reward" is to see that warpgate and think: "I built that". Now, what kind of "risk" should "balance" this kind of "reward"?

You already noticed how something was missing -as NPC structures are undestructable, you made the logical inference: CCP will never allow players to build sand castles that can't be stomped over. Building NPC structures would be "risk free" and yet would provide a reward (in the sense of accomplishment), so it turns that the tainted concept of "risk/reward" in terms of asploding stuff actually prevents to expand the game in other directions even if they don't harm the "core" ship destruction concept.

As a nullseccer and goon, you see EVE as the place where you f*** others and avoid being f***ed. Regretfully, that's a limited point of view that leaves behind a wide majority of players, and now that CCP is struggling to find new players, it is potenially lethal to drive away those players for a shortsighted view of concepts like "risk/reward". Specially when "risk" means "you must allow me to f*** you if I can, if you want to get anyhting in this game".

Didn't you root for Issler in the last election?

That question belongs to fuzzy logic. As CCP doesn't says anything on the issue, we're left to look at what they do.

And they are being increasingly aggressive in obtaining subscriptions, not customers. They've gone as far as offering Power of 2 to new players right after they subscribe.

Think of it, does it look like the kind of thing a company enjoying a healthy growth would do? Also they've been devaluating the price of subscription since Incarna through offers and rebates (I haven't paid a full subcription since May 2012). Old players are being called back (here you have Indahmawar) and are being offered rebates if they stay subscribed.

CCP's current growth strategy is to get alt accounts and call back former users. That is coherent with their development strategy of doing the same better. As all in all, how do you get new people to see your show, when it's the same old show it has been for 10 years?

I agree that we don't have anything ressembling hard data. Nobody says "We are not getting new customers so we do the second best, go after former and returning customers". But CCP's marketing behavior is coherent with a company that attempts to increase revenue per customer and call back former users, rather than get new customers.

It wouldn't shock me to see a "first month discount" offer this year. "Sub your trial and get 30 days for just 12,95 € / $". Wait and see...