EVE General Discussion

It works for Wal-Mart. They make remarkably small margins, but deal in enough bulk to still make piles of cash.


You completely missed my point. You don't know what it's like to be a new player. Forget what you know, and try it.

Or go sob in a corner about how CCP isn't making you feel special enough.

Pretty good comparison. This is EvE...EvE is harsh, even for the bittervets. Adapt or die.

Forums ate my first reply.



You actually typed this out, looked at it, and thought it made sense? Wow.

I've decided that you're an arrogant, self-important, delusional prick who fancies himself one of the intellectual elite. The reality is you're just a douchebag who makes enough money that he can buy stuff for other people either so that they'll like you, or so you can show off how much money you have. You're trying to convince the internet that you're something special because in real life, nobody cares.

You probably make more money than me. Good for you. I'm deliberately under-employed so that I can come home at the end of an eight-hour day without bringing home the load of a stressful job. When I walk in the door, I'm not thinking about work. I won't think about work again until I'm getting ready to leave the next day. It's about my priorities: I've got a wife and two young sons. I take pride not in my paycheck, but in the compliments I get on how well-behaved and how intelligent my children are.

it isn't about survival. I don't want to merely 'survive', I want to surpass and control, like so many did for the first half decade or so of EVE. I want to control, possess, master, and monopolize. you really can't do that like you could for the first 5 and a half years or so. hence why i've stated a few times that I have effectively unsubscribed from EVE and am not resubscribing.

to be completely honest, no person should ever accept a mere survival. it means they've given up of actually succeeding.

Is OP really complaining that its harder to establish a monopoly by himself and his 7 accounts now than it was 7 years ago?

Hmm tears with a vintage? I think they call it WHINE.

...lol

I have stated several ways in which game mechanics have been nerfed/removed effectively taking away power and control of the older players. I shall restate a few here instead of saying 'go read the rest of my posts' since you obviously have no desire to read back... which gives me the impression now matter how many times I restate everything (and I've effectively done it a few times now) people like you will continue to state that I don't provide examples.

1. It is currently impossible to maintain monopolies in the market. it has been this way for several years.
2. Skill intense ships/setups are being negated by ships that don't take anywhere near as long to effectively train to pilot.
IE: Command ships vs T3 cruisers. T3 cruisers take virtually no time to train for (including the support skills) compared to command ships while allocating an often superior firepower with superior tank, and are 'superior' in quite a few other ways. I would not be completely against this if T3's took an effective minimum of a year to train for (including support skills) which would make it still easier to train for than a command ship, but would effectively turn the T3's into something you actually had to plan to train and wouldn't really allow for it to be something impulsively trained capable of blasting to pieces a ship that takes over a year to effectively train.
3. the removal of the old T2 bpo acquisition methods and introduction of the current 'invention' capability.
4. nerfing super caps
5. nerfing the 'effective' high SP ships to the point where there is virtually no purpose in using them since they have no where near the advantage they used to, and to an extent are not cost effective to fly since various T1's and 'pirate/faction' ships can be used to an effective extent. true, the 'pirate' and 'faction' ships are more expensive, the problem is that they are not more skill intensive and thus give an ability to be on equal footing with those who did take the time to train for the skill intense ships.
6. putting a crapload of additional 'beginner' missions in addition to the tutorial. I remember getting a friend to join EVE, and when he ended up getting confused, he made a petition under the wrong category. when he started to complain that he didn't know how to do anything the GM that answered him said something along the lines of 'you have your tutorial. if you can't figure it out after that, find someone in game to teach you. if you can't do that, then f*ck you this game isn't for you' Again, those aren't the exact words, but that was the implication he got from them. He started a new toon, re-did the tutorials, payed attention, and has been enjoying himself in a high sec war dec corp for the past 6 years. because he got the treatment he did in his first week he continued and is one of the most hard-core players I have ever seen (yes, surpassing myself).

The 6th one I did not voice before, and I have others that I have not yet voiced... but if it is desired, I can continue on how EVE has negated the effectiveness of being an old toon.

as for solutions.... I'd say stop the t2 invention, bring back the incredibly rare t2 bpo seed that was way over priced for the 'casual' or 'new' player, remove the ability to have a legal method of buying in-game ISK (GTC/PLEX) so that people actually have to earn said isk and support themselves with actual jobs in RL (get an education you bum!) put super caps back to how they were, don't make less skill intense ships easily outstrip heavy skill intense ships, make a new class of advanced tech ship that needs the effective skills for its 'lesser' t2 counter part while requiring 8x or above skills (yes plural) to train in that are not yet on the market, wow.... I could go on forever... but probably shouldn't.

There's a list of some problems and solutions. That list is in no way shape or form all-inclusive. I reserve the right to add to the list at any time according to my discretion. Reading said list may have hazardous side effects such as thought, logic, sense-making, a realization that this isn't an unfounded topic, and many more. Do not read said list if you have at any time or currently refuse to use logic, actually take the time to understand what is going on, or are not capable of understanding basic concepts, or if you take any psychological medication for anger issues, depression, anxiety, or psychosis. If you suddenly seem to not give a shyte seek immediate psychological assistance, as you may be suffering from acceptance that you're at a low level in life and have a lack of motivation to succeed in RL and other aspects of your daily activity.

Welcome to a growing market.
…which is not nearly as big a difference as people make it out to be since, while you might not need to slog through Battlecruiser V to get the T3s to work, you do need to slog through Warfare Link Specialist V (of the same rank), which you don't need for the CS. So no, the notion that "T3 cruisers take virtually no time to train for" is somewhere between completely uninformed and utterly ludicrous.
…which still means there are opportunities for monopolies, just in different areas.
It's called “balance” — it's a good thing, and no, it does not remove the purpose of using them.
This is a good thing. Thinking this is a problem is utterly idiotic in every way imaginable.

So… what's the problem here again?
Why should age give you any advantage whatsoever?

why shouldn't age give anyone any advantage whatsoever? if people don't get an advantage for training for years, what's the point? and on your logic, why not take out every single type of ship, replace them with a single t1 tier 1 frigate that everyone flies and pilots with the exact same modules and the exact same bonuses with no skills required to train.

idiot friendly?? kinda like the pot calling the kettle black, huh. truth be told, i suspect you're more upset that the game has become less "idiot friendly" over the years.

maintaining a monopoly takes skill, intelligence and some luck, especially with increasing competition. skill training for years longer than other players take no intelligence, just time; the fact that you're not automatically better than younger players requires intelligence and skill on YOUR part to keep up. having to deal with balancing again takes intelligence and skill.

all the things you point to require that YOU exert more intelligence to keep up with the younger players. I'm sorry they took your "i win" button away. Perhaps you would enjoy the game more if you took it off autopilot and actually played the game?

Classic onus probandi fallacy.
Because there is no reason for age to give anyone any advantage whatsoever.
To have fun. To get better. To try another tactic to beat the other guy. …just off the top of my head.
Yeah, no. That's not my logic. So we'll add a straw man fallacy to the list as well. None of that has anything to do with age. I'm asking why being older should make a difference.