EVE General Discussion

and back to labradoodles.

Not sure why I bother. General Discussion should be renamed as "Children who scream about having their toy taken away."

Gankers didn't "need" to use larger ships back then, it was merely that they were economically practicable to use because they were insurable. Now they aren't, so they use more people in smaller ships instead.

Amazingly, deciding that hi-sec ganking was the one form of activity that should void insurance didn't stop people complaining about hi-sec ganking. Nor did 3 CONCORD buffs. Nor did nerfing sec gains from ratting. Oddly enough, each nerf to hi-sec ganking only increases the volume of complaints about it. Would you care to speculate why?

I speculate its because the ganking nerfs didn't work to reduce ganking and the ganking buffs worked to increase ganking - logical conclusion.

Ganking happens less than it used to, despite the increased visibility due to the propaganda of the 2 major groups that partake in it.

There again, a connection with reality is the last thing we'd expect from you.

"More people who don't understand what EVE actually is", says the two month old (alt?). As others have said already, EVE has changed and if you hadn't noticed, it is not attracting many people, regardless of incremental improvements in graphics/ships/hardware/careers etc.

• There are millions of people who enjoy sci-fi out there. What are CCP not doing to attract them to EVE?
• Someone mentioned the gender discrepancy earlier. WoW had/has(?) ten times as many female players. Why? What are Blizzard doing to attract female players?
• Tens of thousands (more?) of people have tried EVE and left. Why?

There are, no doubt, many answers - and the short sighted "PVP sandbox" concept is certainly part of that - , but whatever the reasons, in the long term, the only people who stick around seem to be (a) 'carebears' who have set constructive/creative objectives for themselves, and (b) sociopaths - as evidenced by many of the responses in this thread.

While I don't think the latter are the only reason the PCU is going down, their reputation must certainly play a part in putting people off - both the would-be players and existing casual players who have no means of protecting themselves.

Solution-wise...
The OP was too complicated, but there might be something in it. Sociopaths clearly don't care about costs - they seem to be quite happy to blap empty rookie ships/shuttles for kicks - so solutions based on changes to risk/reward are a dead end. What they will care about is their precious personal time.

If CCP force them to invest as much effort in their activity as other players then they'll get bored and leave... and then EVE might attract more of those "mainstream" people it needs for the long term.

I would go with parts of OP's idea - simply bar negative security characters from jumping into high security space and knock them to down to -10 for every unprovoked attack. If they want to get in they'll have to grind standings for a few hours - ironic PVE activity - and then they lose it all again for a single gank. There's still a risk to the autopiloting freighter with eleventy squillion isk in its hold, but the cost to the aggressor is switched from in-game currency to RL time.

(I guess Alpha clones might offset this, but I suspect the effort of having to reroll just for another [single] kill might be too much.)

That won't fly with CCP, IIRC they've stated several times that they will never mechanically bar negative status players from jumping into hisec.

It would affect more than just hisec gankers; off the top of my head anybody that PvPs in lowsec would be barred, including the FW pilots.

You want to force people to either PvE or spent a sizeable wad on tags every time they PvP with an unwilling volunteer in lowsec or hisec without a wardec? Before you ask, yes PvP in lowsec involves a security hit.

You do realise that Eve is a PvP game, and that the entire universe; including hisec, is a PvP zone, don't you?

Even if the dire idea that you support was to come true, you lot would still moan when it's one freighter a week getting ganked.

It wouldn't take long for CCP to put it down if it became a problem anyway.

I love these comments. Somebody, in a PvP game, who actually shoots another player is of course a sociopath.

Well, if it is okay for those posting these types call those who want to shoot a freighter with 5 billion ISK worth of cargo a sociopath I think it is only fair to point out that such players are lazy, self-entitled incompetents who if they were better at playing the game would have nothing to complain about.

no its not restricted at all, there is just some more paper work involved.

Maybe its the fact that

• Concurrent Play numbers keep falling
• Huge numbers of PvE players have left the game
• CCP Revenues are down year after year
• CCP revenues only look reasonable after losing half their staff
• There are a huge number of space games now compared to the past

That people are not so much failing to understand the concept of "non-consensual PvP" but are suggesting trying something different to boost player numbers before CCP halves its staff again and some idiot on these boards says
"Working as intended"

All CCPs efforts of doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result, mixed with customer service and forum rules back from the 20th Century, has lead us to Free To Play. Otherwise known as the spasm before death.

CCP need to try something different. For one the CSM is a pack of players stuck in the past, which is about the last thing CCP need to listen to.

CCP must evolve or this game is as dead as the Dodo.

So what you are saying is CCP should continue doing the same thing over and over and expect a different result.