EVE General Discussion

Yes.

I think I would like a bacon sandwich with fries.

Swap the fries for a nice mug of tea and I'm with on that one.

Like what? And does it matter in the grand scope?

IRL therea ctually are quite simple rules to verify your claim, though they are all entirely dependent on a by-case interpretation of bigger entities. In other words, if eve was more rl-oriented, you'd have to appeal to goons, provi, hero and N3 to get recognized and given the priviliges to be an entity, and I'd probably be sealand. <.<

No idea why I wrote this partially flawed pile of dren.

Would say, what this game needs is less cynoing and more direct effect of inhabitants on their system. Hue!

I like you, though I dont agree with the less cyno

More = better

Well if you would believe certain posters, OP...

It is the nullsec RMT cartels that are the reason.

IB4 Dins.

I also posted this in the Capital Ships movement thread, but I think it belongs here more tbh;

What I would like to know is;

What rationale has anyone for wanting to keep the natural progression of the way the universe will develop back artificially?

If you constantly change the rules to prevent the accumulation of virtually-insurmountable imperial power, what is the purpose of striving for it in the first place?

Isnt it normal for people to want to form ever larger and larger blocs of power?

I dont want to see that artifically fracture into hundreds of small conflicts. If anything, this would render null uninhabitable as no one would be able to use the resources as they would constantly be at war.

What I would like is to see what happens when the donut is complete

Once there are two or less MegaPowers, will one crumble? will interest wane and it implode? Will there be civil wars? Will anyone finally get around to attacking an Empire with their vast armadas and deposing those faceless tyrants?

If these things are not a) the natural way things or going and/or b) more interesting than the suggestions already given about changes, then Im afraid that there is a strong difference not only in what many people believe that EvE is about but also what makes it a unique game with infinite possibility.

I agree, its like people forget human nature because eve is a game. 'oh ban coalitions!' uh.. you do know people will naturally do this anyway, and figure out was to do this.

The blue doughnut is a natural progresstion, its what will happen eventually. But also you will then have other groups look at the all blue and think 'yummy targets'

The only thing that really does need to change is the sov mechanics. Sov wars are boring as hell. If they could find a balance between enjoyable and work then I think we would all improve. But no matter what they do to sov, human nature will never change. Humans do not like to move, they like protection, a 'home' and they like to gain more power and space to roam. Ideas that go against human nature tend to be stupid.

As an example, the company I work for remodled there Contact worker areas, they removed cubes and assigned seating for modular desk so you can try new areas and collaborate better... the issue tough, is during orientation of the new design, one of the people who helped set up this concept actually said '95% of people pick a spot and stay there" which leads me to go "then why the hades are you trying to do this dumb idea?"

The blue doughnut will die on its own, as less fights happen people will get bored and take a break, then other enties will attack the weaked blue boughnut king and the cycle starts all over.

There is only one correct answer in this thread.




It was Bacon Sandwich.