Darth Magic wrote:While I enjoy ruthless mad play environments, it is also true that I enjoy building and learning.
It is extremely important that players have enough power to be safe in game during early stages. I think CCP is indeed missing a lot of nuance in their analysis of player behavior. It's basic human nature, people shy away from unsafe, even "tough guys".
That is what HS is for. It is the safest space in the game, although it is not "safe" in the sense that if people want to and are willing to face the consequences they can still shoot you. People typically move around HS with little or no interference. This notion that ganking, especially of new players, is rampant is completely unsubstantiated bullshit. In fact, I'm going to go so far as to call it a lie. A blatant bald face lie.
Further, CCP has looked at new player ganking and here are the findings:
1. It is rare. About 1% of players are suicide ganked in their 15 days.
2. Those who are suicide ganked or even killed legally they tend to play longer than those not ganked at all.
Bottom line is that ganking, of new players is both rare and not detrimental.
Here is a presentation of the analysis:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A92Ge2S8M1Y I know many will try and trash the analysis, but please don't I'm tired of taking apart idiotic arguments from boneheads who know ****-from-shinola when it comes to statistics. For example, this was not a mother fecking survey. If you start talking about a survey you are a moron. If you think 80,000 is too small, you are a moron. If you think that debunking the analysis--i.e. some how coming up with a valid criticism of the analysis makes suicide ganking an issue for new players you are a moron.
Darth Magic wrote:---
LESS NEUTRALITY BUT MORE OPTIONS: (Safe Haven Revamp)
1) Eliminate NPC corporation safe havens. All Players would be placed into faction warfare corporations after one week of gameplay. Unless they join a player Corp.
2) Official Safe Havens: Player corps should be able to pay concord for immunity from wardec as long as they meet certain requirements:
*No outposts or citadels can be owned.
*No structures anchored.
*HQ must be in highsec.
*Average character skillpoint under certain threshold.
3*) The above could also be an individual player option. You get immunity in highsec up to a certain age or SP level, if the player chooses to activate this option, and anything up to 1 yr or a certain SP amount above the initial freebie will cost the player some amount of isk. (after that year or SP point, this option will no longer be available.)
---
This is just a basic outline for acheiving that kind haven for newbros that could help retention and gameplay. Harrassment that is "not harrassment per the rules" in Eve should be eliminated in highsec in order to make the game more enjoyable at the early, low sp and low knowledge point stages.
Will this make certain griefers upset? Sure. But who cares, be brave and fight someone who is interested.
There are safe havens in the game, they are called
starter systems. CCP takes a dim view of certain activities directed at new players in those systems. Engage in those activities after being warned off you will, in all likelihood, be banned.
Another place where you can go and avoid PvP is the test server. IIRC, there are designated PvP zones, but the rest of the systems are not--i.e. no PvP unless you consent.
And considering the analysis by CCP this notion of "safe havens" is exactly the wrong approach. It is the wrong approach because people who avoid PvP and player interaction in general....they tend to leave the game sooner than later. You have it backwards.