These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Highsec reform thread: uniting the highsec candidates!

Author
Diemos Hiaraki
Septentrion
#41 - 2015-02-01 23:59:33 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
I think high sec should be a lot smaller and possibly be four high security islands. Concord is retribution, not protection. Vets with plenty of ISK can lose it. Newbies can't throw ships away.

So, there should be a system of protection in starting systems, structures that repair the ships shot at for example. The resources should be scarce and as time goes on taxes keep rising for a player in a newbie corp.

Other NPC corps would be at war with each other.

Essentially, you can avoid fights, be so secure but it becomes more and more difficult to scratch out the ISK you want for the ships you desire.

This vision I agree with. Having a smaller, more secure but not very lucrative starting area is fine design. Unfortunately that is not what we have - in general highsec is far too safe, and worse, far too lucrative.

I think I would classify breaking up highsec into islands as a more radical reform, but one I don't necessarily disagree with on a game design level. I think there would be much resistance from part of the player base if they tried to implement it - the same with making NPC corps at war with each other - but would I would have a lot of respect if CCP showed the gumption to implement those changes. CCP Seagull is claiming to want to move the game in that direction so I am hopeful that we might get a re-balance of the risk vs. reward calculation at some point in the future, especially if CCP wants to drive players into this new space they are supposedly working on.


I expect CCP to implement changes for the long term benefit of Eve, and CCP Seagull among others have made bold and brave steps that for many I think have been extremely positive - for many a huge PITA. For me, the CSM is a body who should predict the outcomes to changes that CCP propose; anyone running under a banner of being 'for high sec' is someone who is against the rest of Eve in it's entirety and I can't find a single reason that anyone 'for high sec' should be heeded while everything should trickle down to high sec not the other way around. Skill should dominate over the risk vs. reward thing, and skill is something folks seem to conveniently forget about whenever balancing of anything is mentioned in Eve and I've not come across many folks who are exclusively high sec players who develop any kind of skill that would be pertinent in any discussion of risk vs. reward.

As far as I'm concerned, where YOU chose to live in the Eve universe should not define who and what you are, your skills as a pilot, as a mission runner, an indy character, as a miner, a trader or an explorer should. Eve should be Eve regardless of where you are, but high sec as it stands now provides the perception to players that they are safe regardless of sec status, standings or almost anything else - a nonsense. Perception, or what a player believes is correct regardless of what the game or or all the game's players think has been the biggest problem in Eve as long as I've been playing.

For example, when I first started playing I was really pissed off about T2BPOs and that fact I couldn't earn one in with in game mechanics like in the old days; to me 'invention' was a personal insult while those older players who 'had been lucky' could produce what I wanted to faster, quicker and cheaper. It's irrelevant whether I was right or not; I quit Eve because of what I believed to be correct at that time, and I'm not the most original person about so others will have done the same before me for exactly the same reasons.

If I believe I do not have the means to compete, then my competition has already won regardless of whether a battle was fought or not. Like in my first week in Eve a Hulk starts mining the same asteroid as I was and I felt completely powerless to do anything about it (I'd not come across things like suicide ganking or bumping,) and I'd bet there are hundreds if not thousands of new players who have been through that scenario who have done nothing but get angry at their keyboards.

I think that most players can handle other players beating them, but when the system is perceived to be beating them at the same time it doesn't make much difference what you do to address what those players think - it's too late, they've either quit, docked up for a week or buggered off to play something else - at the very least they've got frustrated feeling powerless when they should be empowered by being immortal. I've played that boring game where I couldn't undock, couldn't fight unless under absurd terms but could spin ships - it was called Eve online. There is no need for high sec under such circumstances where a player has the perception that they cannot fight back, and that perception over time becomes the carebear ethos which I view as a cancer.

So, prospective high sec CSM candidates I ask a question:

What is the purpose and function of high sec?
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#42 - 2015-02-02 00:47:43 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:

I can. Anyone can.
All you do is run through all their loss and kill mails, finding destroyer after destroyer for years.
There is no way a main would fly only one ship right from newbie.

Thing is - do I want to waste all that time either scripting something to harvest the data or sitting around sifting manually?


Is there a point to this doggerel, or are you still trying to justify your obvious lie?

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#43 - 2015-02-02 01:39:15 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Is there a point to this doggerel, or are you still trying to justify your obvious lie?

I did a preliminary search of EVE-Kill. It is difficult to find losses by ship type, but I searched the recent kill history of CONCORD Police Captain and found these two pilots without more than scratching the surface:
Gallie Crendraven
Gohman Patrouette

These might indeed be throwaway gank alts. They are fairly fresh characters with no killboard history prior to the time they began ganking, both within the previous month. What's more, they might be owned by the same person. They have ganked together a few times.

Just because Jenshae didn't show evidence to support his claim, it doesn't mean your claim that he's wrong is definitely right. I'm leaning toward believing that people really do have throw-away gank alts, and I believe that gankers should be encouraged to prefer their mains.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

admiral root
Red Galaxy
#44 - 2015-02-02 01:42:02 UTC
Throwaway alts are recycled alts. He quite simply does not have any proof that they're more than a myth. Anything he's said since then is simply trying to deflect attention from the fact that he's either a liar or ignorant to the point where he has no business pontificating about the subject.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#45 - 2015-02-02 02:00:45 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:

Just because Jenshae didn't show evidence to support his claim, it doesn't mean your claim that he's wrong is definitely right. I'm leaning toward believing that people really do have throw-away gank alts, and I believe that gankers should be encouraged to prefer their mains.


If you think it's a thing... try it.

I dare you. On Reaver's account. Make a gank alt, cook him for a couple of days, go on a gank spree to neg five or so, then biomass it.

Make sure to say goodbye before you do.

If not, admit that it's a lie.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Jenshae Chiroptera
#46 - 2015-02-02 02:53:59 UTC
I request a new term for your "dedicated" ganker alts, that word is too positive.
Diemos Hiaraki wrote:
anyone running under a banner of being 'for high sec' is someone who is against the rest of Eve
Nota bene Reaver! :P
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Edit: Hey! You changed the title on me! Shocked
I can't claim to solely be a high-sec candidate. It is very easy to point out how I don't live there and it is probably where I have spent the least time behind worm holes and soon to be null sec.
Diemos Hiaraki wrote:
What is the purpose and function of high sec?
As far as I see it is a place for some relatively safe trading and other than that a starting area. Run a few missions, make a few friends, start a corp or join an alliance and move on from there.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#47 - 2015-02-02 03:03:01 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
If you think it's a thing... try it.

I dare you. On Reaver's account. Make a gank alt, cook him for a couple of days, go on a gank spree to neg five or so, then biomass it.

Make sure to say goodbye before you do.

If not, admit that it's a lie.

I have pondered actually spreading out my ganks across multiple characters. It's very nice to get that freebie margin, and it's a lot of work trying to get my sec status back up. It's a tough call sometimes trying to decide whether I'd prefer spending training time or ratting time, though both can be paid off with money. I haven't done any number crunching though, so I don't know what's cheaper, buying back sec status or training an alt. I honestly can't say, I'm just not the one to ask. But I'd wager that if there's a large difference on the two, it'll solve the mystery right then and there.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Jenshae Chiroptera
#48 - 2015-02-02 03:41:38 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
it's a lot of work trying to get my sec status back up. .
One ganker per account. Sit the ganker in sites with a ratting pilot on the other account.
... or do what the high sec guys do and just keep warping around and re-shipping, docking and such dodging the mechanics. They manage to be -10 and it not matter.

Take a covert-cloaked ship to Uedema and warp around following them to see how it works or read an article about hyper-dunking.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#49 - 2015-02-02 05:24:47 UTC
I know how to do all that but it's a logistical pain. You have to make all of your moves quick, so you have to know what you're doing beforehand. I like to mope around lazily looking for gank targets without having to scoot every time I exit warp just because the navy is after me.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Jenshae Chiroptera
#50 - 2015-02-02 12:47:44 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
I know how to do all that but it's a logistical pain. You have to make all of your moves quick, so you have to know what you're doing beforehand. I like to mope around lazily looking for gank targets without having to scoot every time I exit warp just because the navy is after me.
So, what you are say is that they are rather obsessed to go to such efforts circumventing the mechanics and waving their -10 sec around rather than sit with some ratters? TwistedP

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#51 - 2015-02-02 17:04:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
No, I'm saying that I'm not likely to dip into the yellow unless I have previously planned a way back up. And don't try to infer other pirates' mentalities from mine because many of them are a lot more comfortable in lowsec than I am.

You know, it's very likely that there are pirates who use untrained alt accounts to scout for ganks and use their main or a well-trained alt to perform the gank. This would help one circumvent the Navy in order to scout around comfortably. It's only speculation but it seems like a good idea, therefore I assume there are some people who do it.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Jenshae Chiroptera
#52 - 2015-02-03 01:02:05 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
No, I'm saying that I'm not likely to dip into the yellow unless I have previously planned a way back up. And don't try to infer other pirates' mentalities from mine because many of them are a lot more comfortable in lowsec than I am.

You know, it's very likely that there are pirates who use untrained alt accounts to scout for ganks and use their main or a well-trained alt to perform the gank. This would help one circumvent the Navy in order to scout around comfortably. It's only speculation but it seems like a good idea, therefore I assume there are some people who do it.


TwistedP = wicked teasing

Yes, you can scout with a mining barge if you are hunting miners or cloaked ships are a favourite, line them up, warp 10 from them and land right on your target.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Lorelei Ierendi
Lorelei for C S M
#53 - 2015-02-08 12:11:02 UTC
Diemos Hiaraki wrote:


...the carebear ethos which I view as a cancer.


Shocked

Diemos Hiaraki wrote:
So, prospective high sec CSM candidates I ask a question:

What is the purpose and function of high sec?


The purpose of High Sec is the same as the purpose of Low Sec or of Null Sec.

The function of High Sec seems to be to trap a large majority of players here, that never get the chance to see another side of the game... and feel that they are entitled to the protection of the Developers, and that game play methods that have been there since the beginning are actually mean and unkind. But that is something that the NPE should work on fixing.

The function of High Sec should be to provide a bit more "security" from piracy and stuff... than Low Sec does... and to provide the Capsuleers with different challenges with regards to taxation, trading, war and so on. Unfortunately the vast majority of my care bear cousins will never know that threads like this exist. Why I expect that they don't even know that the forums exist! Oops

This is one of the things that really has to change, in order for High Sec to become more than it is at the moment.

http://hisec-carebear.blogspot.de/

Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#54 - 2015-03-10 19:40:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Maldiro Selkurk
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
I think the best way to balance the value of AFK activities is to make it so that all of them combined yield less than a PLEX costs, thus making it unprofitable to make many alt accounts just for passive income. Execution is something to be discussed but I think that would make a good goal. Now as many have discussed before, a good portion of the playerbase would resent having highsec mining reduced in pay to a fraction of a PLEX for a whole month of work. Perhaps, then, the solution is to find some way to discourage mining 23.5/7 in favor of the way real people mine, thus giving real players enough of an advantage in the area to make it slightly profitable yet still something we can remove from the list of activities deemed to be AFK profit.


1. completely passive income should be removed from the game.

2. Reducing the income stream of one of the least profitable game play options is a HORRIBLE idea.

3. Why discourage mining, do you want us miners to discourage what you like to do in the game?

4. I am in favor of making mining a career where if you play it semi-afk you make substantially less than if you actively play. This could be accomplished rather simply by making knowing when to stop a cycle worth a lot more. Increase the number of strip miners on each ship and increase the cycle time considerably. This would make partial cycle management a much larger benefit than it is currently (you would probably have to increase crystal longevity to account for these changes, as well as decrease the amount that each strip miner stripped each cycle).

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#55 - 2015-03-10 20:08:29 UTC
Diemos Hiaraki wrote:
There is so much about high sec that doesn't make sense, and no matter how I look at Eve as a whole I don't think high sec 'fits' in with any other areas in Eve. The crime and punishment rules of high sec moulds (molds if you're a septic) a lot of new players into risk adverse players (actually that should be afraid to shoot because CONCORD) by it's very nature and rather that messing around with a load of code that will just be exploited by those who like picking on the weak I think it would be more constructive to abolish high sec entirely.

What exactly is the purpose of high sec and why is it good for the future development of Eve and it's playerbase? At the minute to me it appears high sec is a playground for bittervets to hit players who can't or won't hit back. High sec doesn't teach folks how to fit a ship, doesn't provide an environment where banding together becomes a necessity... high sec just teaches players not to leave high sec, turtle up in station if war decced or get bored and quit alone. Sure you can earn isk in high sec in relative safety, but again this only teaches players not to leave high sec.

If sov null gets fixed this year in a meaningful way then I see absolutely no reason to keep high sec in the game at all (given that a lot of bittervets will have something worthy of attacking/defending and should be able to earn enough in null to pay for their kit they need.) I also think that ship/module balancing could be much more interesting if high sec wasn't a thing; freighters are pretty much useless even in high sec now to a solo player for example and had freighters been balanced with low sec or null in mind they could be much more interesting ships than they are now.

If you are into ganking you can do that anywhere. If you are not into ganking you can do that anywhere. Meanwhile we are something like 20k online characters down on when I had to quit last year - that was my first impression on coming back to Eve, and for me that is a most disturbing trend. I don't think Eve is dying, but I think there is a gap between the bittervet and new player characters who got bored and quit entirely because of high sec mechanics.

Priority this year for CSM though should be sov and structures - if I were a bit more experienced with either I'd be running for CSM myself.


Honestly, I see your point but im wondering why you dont apply the same beliefs to the rest of EVE. SOV should be discarded completely, CCP could put stations everywhere so that industry keeps going but if your corp is mostly / entirely offline between 0400 and 0800 expect to come back to your station surrounded by reds. Want your products out of the station then you better be willing to fight for them or pay to get 'safe' passage out. (yes i know that this would require adjustments for titans like allowing them to dock and be built in station).

If we are going to pull the safety net out from highsec players then it is time we did the same for the rest of EVE. Let the carnage begin!

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#56 - 2015-03-10 20:16:31 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Black Pedro wrote:
Otherwise, if you give protection to them for free why would any corp bother to spend the resources or effort on defending themselves?
I think my answer to the next quote should answer most of your post.
Diemos Hiaraki wrote:
At the minute to me it appears high sec is a playground for bittervets to hit players who can't or won't hit back.
... high sec just teaches players not to leave high sec, turtle up in station if war decced or get bored and quit alone. Sure you can earn isk in high sec in relative safety, but again this only teaches players not to leave high sec.
I think there is a gap between the bittervet and new player characters who got bored and quit entirely because of high sec mechanics..
I think high sec should be a lot smaller and possibly be four high security islands. Concord is retribution, not protection. Vets with plenty of ISK can lose it. Newbies can't throw ships away.

So, there should be a system of protection in starting systems, structures that repair the ships shot at for example. The resources should be scarce and as time goes on taxes keep rising for a player in a newbie corp.

Other NPC corps would be at war with each other.

Essentially, you can avoid fights, be so secure but it becomes more and more difficult to scratch out the ISK you want for the ships you desire.


The chopping up highsec idea is just bad. People mostly stay in their chosen game play area as it is already, and this horrible idea would further reduce interactions between the various regions and races.

Let me propose an equally ****** idea and I think you will see what I mean. How about we instead make high sec much bigger than it already is, sending spokes of highsec out to the edges of EVE, thus dividing low and nullsec into sections.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#57 - 2015-03-10 21:14:45 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
"Dedicated" is too positive a word for alts that are designed to fly only destroyers because they can be thrown against a target over and over, losing the ships without the main even blinking at the cost.

There is a lot more to ganking than a few dedicated alliances in high sec. A public example is Goons embargos.

Black Pedro wrote:
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
I think high sec should be a lot smaller and possibly be four high security islands. Concord is retribution, not protection. Vets with plenty of ISK can lose it. Newbies can't throw ships away.

So, there should be a system of protection in starting systems, structures that repair the ships shot at for example. The resources should be scarce and as time goes on taxes keep rising for a player in a newbie corp.

Other NPC corps would be at war with each other.

Essentially, you can avoid fights, be so secure but it becomes more and more difficult to scratch out the ISK you want for the ships you desire.

This vision I agree with. Having a smaller, more secure but not very lucrative starting area is fine design. Unfortunately that is not what we have - in general highsec is far too safe, and worse, far too lucrative.

I think I would classify breaking up highsec into islands as a more radical reform, but one I don't necessarily disagree with on a game design level. I think there would be much resistance from part of the player base if they tried to implement it - the same with making NPC corps at war with each other - but would I would have a lot of respect if CCP showed the gumption to implement those changes. CCP Seagull is claiming to want to move the game in that direction so I am hopeful that we might get a re-balance of the risk vs. reward calculation at some point in the future, especially if CCP wants to drive players into this new space they are supposedly working on.
Reaver brought up the idea of a "middle sec" which had me thinking. What if the areas between the high sec islands had faction guards, rather than Concord?

Then you can raise faction in your area of high sec to show where you are most loyal and that would determine where you are guarded.

The guards would take a quick read of a few things like eHP, damage and such then spawn some help, including logistics help that would try and repair the ships that were first attacked.
It would be similar to attacking one gang and having another appear to help them rather than the all mighty Concord gods blasting your ship out of existance.


Raising faction in highsec takes quite a bit of time as things currently stand, with your proposal someone trying to gain faction as a newbie flying level one missions is going to be griefed into finding another game to play. Also, the established alliances / corps / players will do their best to make sure you never reach or leave a highsec dock.. Even if you did persist and reached level 10 faction the aggressors will figure out the AI of the defending force and nullify it. Human IQ > computer AI.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#58 - 2015-03-10 21:47:20 UTC
Lorelei Ierendi wrote:
Diemos Hiaraki wrote:


...the carebear ethos which I view as a cancer.


Shocked

Diemos Hiaraki wrote:
So, prospective high sec CSM candidates I ask a question:

What is the purpose and function of high sec?


The purpose of High Sec is the same as the purpose of Low Sec or of Null Sec.

The function of High Sec seems to be to trap a large majority of players here, that never get the chance to see another side of the game... and feel that they are entitled to the protection of the Developers, and that game play methods that have been there since the beginning are actually mean and unkind. But that is something that the NPE should work on fixing.

The function of High Sec should be to provide a bit more "security" from piracy and stuff... than Low Sec does... and to provide the Capsuleers with different challenges with regards to taxation, trading, war and so on. Unfortunately the vast majority of my care bear cousins will never know that threads like this exist. Why I expect that they don't even know that the forums exist! Oops

This is one of the things that really has to change, in order for High Sec to become more than it is at the moment.


[nullsec players]......feel that they are entitled to the protection of the developers (SOV, which should be entirely removed) and that [this and similar] game play methods should be maintained because they have been around in the game so long.

Additionally, massive alliances should have fewer barriers between them and smashing new players, solo players and small developing corps removed because anything but a completely predictable outcome in their favor scares them.

Nullsecs obsession over reducing highsec into more lowsec like space is because they are bored from NOT fighting each other and want some easy pickings. Nullsec needs to give off their collective asses and punch their neighbors in the nuts and get the blast on. Then they will be so busy and having so much fun they won't need to constantly moan about destroying highsec game play.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Jenshae Chiroptera
#59 - 2015-03-11 01:11:20 UTC
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
4. I am in favor of making mining a career where if you play it semi-afk you make substantially less than if you actively play..
I am winding down for the days so will just cherry pick one now.

No thanks.
I PVP, have more PVP than I want. I could rat and make more ISK but that is too active.
When I am semi-AFK mining, I am dealing with EVE mails, e-mails, chatting to people, organising things RL and in EVE, ... so on and so forth.

Basically, I am taking some down time between fighting and social-bleh to make a bit of ISK and relax. Make mining an active thing and I will just dock up and do those other things.
One less target for people to cry about not having enough around.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Diemos Hiaraki
Septentrion
#60 - 2015-03-11 10:38:18 UTC
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
Diemos Hiaraki wrote:
snip


Honestly, I see your point but im wondering why you dont apply the same beliefs to the rest of EVE. SOV should be discarded completely, CCP could put stations everywhere so that industry keeps going but if your corp is mostly / entirely offline between 0400 and 0800 expect to come back to your station surrounded by reds. Want your products out of the station then you better be willing to fight for them or pay to get 'safe' passage out. (yes i know that this would require adjustments for titans like allowing them to dock and be built in station).

If we are going to pull the safety net out from highsec players then it is time we did the same for the rest of EVE. Let the carnage begin!


I didn't think there would be any point in talking about sov that much given this a thread about high sec. I don't just advocate retiring high sec, it's the whole fixed sec system that needs looking at imo and that includes sov null. That's a thread for a different day though.