EVE General Discussion

"CCP claims that more than 50% of the player base is employed in engineering."
.... hehehe

Nice EVE promo article though, needs more re-exposure to keep the interest from waning.

Perhaps they mean Network Engineering or Systems Engineering, or in the case of ISK schemes . . . Social engineering.

it is a good read

It was okay. Filled with errors, as per usual for modern journalism.

Great article, thanks!

“I ran with that and made a costume based on the player’s feedback. I showed up here wearing the costume because I’m 55 years old and I don’t give a crap any more.”

From the article:

Do you hear that you "EVE is Dying" A-holes?

Now stfu about it.

Politically and economically speaking you're wrong, in Eve, as in the real world, the economy and politics are intertwined and generally in the hands of those who wield the biggest sticks.

That tiny little island once controlled 25% of the planet's landmass and the associated economies, by wielding the biggest stick of the time.

Interesting article.

Pity about that comments section. Then again I could say that abut any comments section on the internet.



I'd quibble on a few points.

First: Real world politics ~aren't~ like high-school style popularity contests? (you're welcome to look at the recent election campaigns in the UK for good examples of this in action).

Second: most of the politics in EVE boil down to democracy vs communism vs capitalism vs feudal dictatorships vs some amalgamation of these (as a UK resident, I find it amusing that socialism (or in the case of the UK, social democracy) is almost entirely absent in most respects). It's just that some of the debates also happen to include 1400mm howitzers (don't I recall some dude saying something about war being an extension of politics?).

Thus far, in-game, democracy has leaned towards losing some degree of favour (due to basically being hamstrung in high speed situations) when going up against communo-capitalist-dictatorships, for example (largely because dictatorships in general only require one person to make a decision, rather than a group (or more)), as various groups try to work together providing ship replacement programs, while encouraging profiteering from members, often at the expense of high-sec or opposing alliances/coalitions, all under the direction of some vaguely popular (or "popular") space-important leader.

Example:
Politics in EVE also depend on how we view various alliances and the way they operate.
Many dislike goons - for example - because they go out of their way to not take this game seriously ~at all~ while still trying to enjoy it and min-max it like everyone else does. They also dislike goons (obligatory "grr goons") because of goons basically owning the propaganda from the "Great War" that described them as "bad guys" - to which they turned and said "yeah, okay, let's be bad guys, now we'll ruin the games of people who take it this seriously that they need to camp us into a null station for a couple months".

They promptly watched groups like BoB who operated on the feudal dictatorship model (often treating "vassal" alliances with some degree of arrogance), and the way BoB villanised them (prior to goons owning it) while using their battleships to camp their sorry t1 noob rears into a station (back when battleships could 1-shot frigs), and decided to do almost exactly the opposite.

Instead of taking the game super seriously, and trying to be "elite" like BoB or the other old boys clubs, they decided to revel in being "noobs", and being terrible, and not taking this game seriously at all.

These guys are basically an example of communist dictatorships in action, when that type of politics is combined with a degree of capitalism. I'll leave you to figure out the real world equivalent in terms of global politics.



Let's take a look at another example:
BoB:
BoB was pretty big. They used their propaganda to be the "good guys". Even when they weren't. They were the "white knights" (as some will accuse them of being). They had a great many allies and various agreements in null.
They were the pre-eminent space-important dudes, who had favour of the devs (~cough~cough), and were viewed by the general populace as being the good guys to the bad of red federation and later goonswarm.
They were "elite" and favoured supporting this. In MAX campaigns for example, you were only "allowed" to make money for one week of a given month, and the rest of the time you "had" to take part in pvp ops.
(In a computer game...)

Even in real world meetups, vassal alliances were often assigned locations at the party that were a little away from where the "core" groups could hang out.
They were champions in the sense that if you were deemed good enough, you would be brought to the big table.
An example of western feudal-capitalist-dictatorships if ever I saw one.
Willing to take their big assets, make tons of cash from their own production lines, but keep it all to themselves, SRP programs under BoB were non-existent (unless you were in favour, of course).
I say this from personal prior experience as a rapidly ex-member of the GBC (Greater BoB Community) from one of the "preferred" groups.


Third: in modern eve as we expand on null, there will be increasing concerns re immigration, welfare programs (SRP being added by CCP?), spies, betrayals, resourcing, security and armament, WMD proliferation (titans/supers), proper allocation of alliance funds and structures/resources, and plenty more besides. Real world parallels much?


Fourth: I don't dispute the economy is unfinished - players don't have full control of it, and it is not closed-loop (skillbooks, implants, and blueprints being key examples (of certain points being out of our control) in action). I merely dispute the use of the word "severely" when we have had full blown economists apply real world tactics successfully in EVE (and in a few cases, visa versa - which can be discovered with a little forum digging).

True - but it does teach you some limited basics of simple logic gates.