These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

The foreseeable future of Eve
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Karrl Tian
Doomheim
#101 - 2012-10-14 04:07:13 UTC
LT Alter wrote:
Karrl Tian wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:


When you think about it, EVE is quite possibly the only MMO that downright necessitates the usage of alt accounts. I've never played another game that needed players to have more than one account to be effective.



When did EVE ever require alts to be effective?


To be good? You don't need one, to be effective then yes you need one, two, or 14 alts like me.


Effective at what?
usrevenge
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#102 - 2012-10-14 04:45:28 UTC
eve isn't dieing.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#103 - 2012-10-14 05:20:59 UTC
LT Alter wrote:


You are plain and simple the dumbest person to post on this thread.


Actually I think you didn't get enough oxygen at birth. You repeat yourself over and over but fail to produce a single line of any kind of proof that would support your argument.

.
LT Alter
Ryba.
White Squall.
#104 - 2012-10-14 05:21:26 UTC
Karrl Tian wrote:
LT Alter wrote:
Karrl Tian wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:


When you think about it, EVE is quite possibly the only MMO that downright necessitates the usage of alt accounts. I've never played another game that needed players to have more than one account to be effective.



When did EVE ever require alts to be effective?


To be good? You don't need one, to be effective then yes you need one, two, or 14 alts like me.


Effective at what?


Everything, more alts = more income, more effective pvp, more everything really. Just one alt can allow you to do just about everything better.
LT Alter
Ryba.
White Squall.
#105 - 2012-10-14 05:22:40 UTC
Roime wrote:
LT Alter wrote:


You are plain and simple the dumbest person to post on this thread.


Actually I think you didn't get enough oxygen at birth. You repeat yourself over and over but fail to produce a single line of any kind of proof that would support your argument.



Actually I think you are blind, and your brain didn't develop properly through your childhood because I have explained my claims in depth over the discussion of this thread, read and you will learn.
LT Alter
Ryba.
White Squall.
#106 - 2012-10-14 05:24:59 UTC
usrevenge wrote:
eve isn't dieing.


Sure, you are one of those being babied by CCP. Go ahead, trust they are doing what is best for the game... 1 year from now you will think everything is great 2 years from now it will all burn in a fire and you will never understand what happened.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#107 - 2012-10-14 07:09:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Ugh. Why do people always try to invent such easily debunked data to “prove” their assertions? What?
LT Alter wrote:

Look up the logged in player charts, there is your example.
Logged in players show that we're currently recovering from a dip that took place back in spring, and that before that, the game was recovering from the Incursion/Incarna apocalypse.

Quote:
2008 we have about 40,000 on about everyday, and 60,000 on the weekends
…if by 40,000 you mean 30,000 and by 60,000 you mean 40,000. The PCU record at the time was 42.6k in March and 43.7k by December. It was never regularly in the 60k+ (that was approached only by two tournament-fuelled PCU records, once in June 2010 and once in January 2011, hot on the heels of two — very briefly, but quickly crashing — crowd-pleasing expansions).

So no, this invention of yours does not provide any kind of example or proof that the sanbox is declining. Any other facts of history you'd like to alter?
SketS47
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#108 - 2012-10-14 09:38:29 UTC
I agree with OP, CCP is making very critical mistakes other (now dead) mmo's have made before.

They are making things to easy, to comfortable and without challenge.

On another note; I found this great game called Hello Kitty Online its almost like eve, but than challenging and the end-game is like lvl's and stuff instead of isk farming.
Kinis Deren
Mosquito Squadron
D0GS OF WAR
#109 - 2012-10-14 10:04:16 UTC
I'm confused and yah, that isn't an unfamiliar condition to find myself inP

OP, you state that the sandbox is likely to suffer a terminal decline with the upcoming expansion(s). How so? Can you give specific examples that illustrate how your game style choices are likely to be prohibited?
Karrl Tian
Doomheim
#110 - 2012-10-14 13:48:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Karrl Tian
LT Alter wrote:
Karrl Tian wrote:
LT Alter wrote:
Karrl Tian wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:


When you think about it, EVE is quite possibly the only MMO that downright necessitates the usage of alt accounts. I've never played another game that needed players to have more than one account to be effective.



When did EVE ever require alts to be effective?


To be good? You don't need one, to be effective then yes you need one, two, or 14 alts like me.


Effective at what?


Everything, more alts = more income, more effective pvp, more everything really. Just one alt can allow you to do just about everything better.


Yeah, you're right Sad... the ability to PLEX multiple accounts probably did more damage to this game than any other buff/nerf/added feature ever could (and that includes Incarna).
Bane Necran
Appono Astos
#111 - 2012-10-14 14:08:19 UTC
TL;DR: if people who are terrible at PvP can't grief the defenseless it will spell doom for this game.

Anyone who just wants to attack the weak and powerless should probably quit anyway. Go join a WoW server and camp low level players with their max level elf or whatever. I'd like to see PvP in EVE become more about the strong fighting the strong, instead of the strong ganging up on noobs. Seriously, that **** is pathetic.

"In the void is virtue, and no evil. Wisdom has existence, principle has existence, the Way has existence, spirit is nothingness." ~Miyamoto Musashi
LT Alter
Ryba.
White Squall.
#112 - 2012-10-14 16:29:22 UTC
Bane Necran wrote:
TL;DR: if people who are terrible at PvP can't grief the defenseless it will spell doom for this game.

Anyone who just wants to attack the weak and powerless should probably quit anyway. Go join a WoW server and camp low level players with their max level elf or whatever. I'd like to see PvP in EVE become more about the strong fighting the strong, instead of the strong ganging up on noobs. Seriously, that **** is pathetic.


I quit attacking the weak and powerless about a year ago, it got boring. If you stopped to pay attention some of the best pvpers live in high sec because they are sick of low/null sec. If I was complaining about not being able to kill noobs I would have said more about the upcoming changes, instead I haven't really mentioned them at all. I'm only expressing my fear that Eve will die because CCP are making terrible decisions with their game.
LT Alter
Ryba.
White Squall.
#113 - 2012-10-14 16:30:32 UTC  |  Edited by: LT Alter
Karrl Tian wrote:
Yeah, you're right Sad... the ability to PLEX multiple accounts probably did more damage to this game than any other buff/nerf/added feature ever could (and that includes Incarna).


No, it probably helped this game quite a bit. There is no damage in having alts, it merely skews what people think are lone subscribers that are actually part of a group of alts. While eve may be growing in subs, it isn't growing in players as much as most people think.
Idris Helion
Doomheim
#114 - 2012-10-14 16:43:09 UTC
Actual human players at any given moment? Probably more like 18-20K, given that just about everyone uses at least one alt (and some four, or five, or ten). That's why I always roll my eyes a bit at those fleet battles out in nullsec -- what you really have are about ten or fifteen guys dual- or triple-boxing. I'd bet that about 70% of all EVE corps are composed of a main and some alts.

EVE's population may seem static, but I think it's true that the actual number of subscribers has fallen over the years. It's just that all the extra accounts pad out the numbers. And really, that's hardly surprising: EVE is coming up on a decade old. That's an incredibly long time for a game to remain viable.

Tippia wrote:
Ugh. Why do people always try to invent such easily debunked data to “prove” their assertions? What?
LT Alter wrote:

Look up the logged in player charts, there is your example.
Logged in players show that we're currently recovering from a dip that took place back in spring, and that before that, the game was recovering from the Incursion/Incarna apocalypse.

Quote:
2008 we have about 40,000 on about everyday, and 60,000 on the weekends
…if by 40,000 you mean 30,000 and by 60,000 you mean 40,000. The PCU record at the time was 42.6k in March and 43.7k by December. It was never regularly in the 60k+ (that was approached only by two tournament-fuelled PCU records, once in June 2010 and once in January 2011, hot on the heels of two — very briefly, but quickly crashing — crowd-pleasing expansions).

So no, this invention of yours does not provide any kind of example or proof that the sanbox is declining. Any other facts of history you'd like to alter?
Darek Castigatus
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#115 - 2012-10-14 19:36:25 UTC
LT Alter wrote:
Roime wrote:
LT Alter wrote:


Criminal key word, yet they protect all of those who wish not to pvp.

Nope CONCORD protects those I wish to fight


Are you really that blind? CONCORD protects you from people you don't want to fight, that is the reason you are in hisec, with the other carebears.

And you don't wish to "fight" anybody, if you would, you would embrace this expansion as it makes white knighting possible, giving you more opponents. YOU were protected by CONCORD from these people who wanted to fight you, now they have a switch that causes CONCORD to look the other way for 15 minutes. Which means that Retribution is less safe to you, carebear.

Quote:
wrong again hi sec accounts for a lot of pvp and has massive effect on null, much more than you see
to realize.


RvB accounts for most of the PVP in hisec, rest is insignificant and whole EVE is laughing at you.

Quote:
No I will not I've lived in null and low and I hate it.

Your biased report on the way eve works is unimpressive and bores me.


You hate something, and suddenly my report is biased Lol

Are you Taranius de Consolville?

You still haven't presented a single proof to support your weak arguments, just chicken-little omgomgomgeveisdying whining.

Man up, bud.





You are plain and simple the dumbest person to post on this thread.


besides you, obviously.

Pirates - The Invisible Fist of Darwin

you're welcome
Touval Lysander
Zero Wine
#116 - 2012-10-14 20:15:22 UTC
SketS47 wrote:
I agree with OP, CCP is making very critical mistakes other (now dead) mmo's have made before.

They are making things to easy, to comfortable and without challenge.

On another note; I found this great game called Hello Kitty Online its almost like eve, but than challenging and the end-game is like lvl's and stuff instead of isk farming.

Yeah, See this is where I am getting terribly confused.

This apparent change to "easy-mode" (which is debatable in itself), is to only one sector of Eve. I don't recall seeing anything about Concord moving to 0.0 or to lowsec or into WH's.

I was away yesterday, perhaps I missed a dev post?

"I've always been mad, I know I've been mad, like the most of us...very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad..."
Darth Khasei
Wavestar Business Ventures Inc.
#117 - 2012-10-14 20:38:29 UTC
LT Alter wrote:
The dooms were avoided by those screaming it out, you may not believe it so but stuff like the incarna protest were started by those screaming dooms and forcing CCP to make changes. I'm yelling for change to help save the game, not to scare you all in to quitting...

Also PI is not a play style is a way of making isk. CCP is removing my entire playstyle and trying to push me and others in to low and null...


No that is just revisionist history. There are PLENTY of things that are in the game right now that people called doom on and were flat out 100% WRONG.

You are yelling no doubt, but perhaps a bit myopically focused on "your playstyle" and not the overall game as well as being made prematurely is what people are trying to get you to see.

PI IS a playstyle if that is essentially all you are doing.
shadowhearth Eto
Subsidy H.R.S.
Xagenic Freymvork
#118 - 2012-10-14 20:59:33 UTC
sounds like trammel 2.0 EVE style.
MatrixSkye Mk2
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#119 - 2012-10-14 21:18:01 UTC
Is Eve dying? No. At least not in the sense you're implying.

Will these changes upset hi sec PVPers looking for lo-risk easy kills? Yes. It will. My opinion if it matters? They're a very small but extremely vocal minority which in the end won't matter much when they quit. Why? Because one bittervet gone equates to a few new players in.

And before some bittervet claims that only h4rdc0re PVPers stick around Eve for long, I'll just say that I've been playing Eve since 05 and I'm not planning on quitting any time soon. My corp is like-minded and have been around for a while as well.

I don't doubt that your enjoyment of your game is dying. But I think that is all that can be claimed. Eve has evolved througout the years. You can either adapt and roll with the punches or hang the towel.

Successfully doinitwrong™ since 2006.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#120 - 2012-10-14 21:29:48 UTC
MatrixSkye Mk2 wrote:
My corp is like-minded and have been around for a while as well.

Republic University still going strong