EVE Information Portal

So they took it from a 65,000 player coalition who didn't want that space anyway?

ahahahahahahahahaha

"please CCP make it harder to be friends because I can't do squat to them waaaaaaaaaah"

What if that's the kind of friendship we want?

Except, as we can clearly see if we look at what is actually happening in eve, it doesn't. Blues and NAP everywhere.

So essentially, you're saying it's not fair we fought, held, defended, fueled, scooped, and politicked our way to tech holding. It should be taken away from us by the Devs and given to alliances that refuse to do that, amirite?



NERF FRIENDS

EDIT: Hi Fozzie! Welcome to your first blogpost thread. Good first step.

"nerf the ability of players to work together in a massively multiplayer online game"

Papa Digger best Digger

By my own observations the act of moon mining the high end products is normally done at Alliance level and not as the presumption appears to be one mainly of personal income streams as this is certainly not the case.

The resulting income from these activities are then used to finance the Alliance economic structure, the roots of which extend throughout the EVE economy, mess with that and you open a can of worms marked up 'Nasty' these creatures are by there very nature utterly unpredictable.

While we all fully perceive there is a problem with Tech it is that very problem that has promoted some of the best play 'Interaction' that has to date been seen in EVE for thousands of players over the past years.

It is to be hoped that these CCP 'shining lights' tread very carefully with this one or they run the risk of collapsing the EVE economy in ways they may find very detrimental to the game overall, it might on the surface appear to be broken but is it really broken.

Many R/L financial wizards have attempted to impose there own version of how they see things should be and the results have almost inevitably been very painful for world economies as what appears to be a simple fix to the entrails has always caused a domino effect across it as the market attempts to adjust, inevitably for most it has meant massive financial loss and market instability.

Similar with EVE, if you tinker then you had better be damned sure you fully understand the implications of every aspect and nuance of the changes your making before you even announce your thinking about doing it, adding your own home grown EULA to your announcement simply will not cut it.

Currently as things stand the high ends are reasonably distributed across the various Alliances and factions which bleed the resultant produce into the market driven utterly by the random nature of the markets influence, nothing new there is there, but looking at how that situation came about leads you to the conclusion that it was the very fact that the original distribution table for high end moons was so skewed that it was inevitable that this situation would eventually emerge, the moons are fixed, does not matter who owns them there influence on the market will be a stable one 'In the Long Term', knee jerk reactions to short term fluctuations in the market will not change a thing for the better as this system grew organically from the very roots of EVE.

The economy in EVE was broken on day one, market forces however micro managed those failings in the original model and produced a workable solution and that is the way things should work, hypothesize that your not dealing here with a games virtual market but with the one and only thing in EVE that represents anything approaching a real life entity, poking and stabbing at it will inevitably cause a reaction far beyond that intended.

That the high end moons drive that economy has been long understood by players, how this comes about maybe not be so fully understood by most and it has become more obvious over time that CCP certainly is way off the mark in it's understanding of how players actually interact with EVE and it,s various facets, I for one would be very wary about making such a fundamental change to that.

No sense your logic make.

tech is overpowered, without a doubt.

why you thought to change the prom and dyspro set up to a moon mineral only located in the north ? only you CCP can answer.

the thing that worries me is not the income stream, but the income. 0.0 pvp alliances need a reason to attack space, they need a reason for conflict. Be very careful if you push the income stream to the individual rather than the alliance or corp itself.

High SP players want and need to fight battles with ships that are in relation to the character age and level i.e tech III fleet fights and using supers on a daily or weekly basis. if incomes become tight then people will be less likely to use shiney fleet compositions and more and more boring drakes. Also remember that people in drakes will in most cases have alot more fun popping the same ships classes , who wouldn't rather kill a loki than a drake ?

I am not stating people will not fly these classes without tech but over time alliances will start to consider dropping to more affordable ship classes , battle cruiser online is not that much fun.

If making isk for a 0.0 pvp alliance becomes too much of a time restraint , will people still have fun ? I am not saying we need to have easy or free isk streams , i mean pvpers are not wanting to spend time messing about with boring pve activities just to fund the pvp habit. People will suggest renters and getting more pve focused characters or corps in an alliance but this will only work in a very small scale and sounds good in theroy but never works in practice.



I don't want this to sound like a moan about tech , it is not !. It is more about making sure the changes are fair and balanced but the consideration of pvp alliances are considered so that we can still have epic battles !