EVE General Discussion

I think that the main focus of people's complaints have become a little clouded for some people, while others have simply jumped on the band wagon and started complaining about "X thing in Eve is hurting the small guy". It wasn't always just about the small guy, it was about everyone across Eve. It isn't just the small guy that's effected by these issues, it's all of us. Not everyone wants to be the little guy, and not everyone wants to be in the shadow of immense power projection and unstoppable forces while dealing with broken mechanics, risk averse entities and blue doughnuts.

The only people who are actually bothered about SP are either A) A recruiter for specific roles, B) A new player that is unable to grasp the sandbox that is Eve or C) Idiots, blunt I know but really it's stupid. But that's just in specific complaints and isn't really important here.

Part of the problem is that for entities to achieve something, they require someone/some people at the top of the pile to, basically, do most of the work for them. They don't always have someone like this, so they try to find some sort of excuse, they turn to blaming the game and get the idea that the game should be handing their achievements to them, providing them with power enough to topple their foes instead of working to the top like you see with a lot of major groups in Eve. They think that if they complain enough, CCP will listen and start to hand them these "I WIN" buttons and/or dumb down Eve, this is not the case.

The same thing happened to other MMOs, WoW (Vanilla and BC prime) and Tera(Beta and release period) come to mind, however in their case the devs actually listened to the vocal masses of incompetents and ultimately drove the games into the ground, leaving the husks that we see today which are still being milked for every drop. There's many other games where the same thing occurred but these are just examples. So it doesn't surprise me that some people may try similar things with Eve, especially considering Eve's history (Jita riots, "P2W" scandal etc). There will always be entitled vocal fools who just want their hollow accomplishments, because they'll just move onto the next game after they've ruined their current venture.

But this is where we get to that grey area, because there are many issues with Eve, we all know this, some of them are even part of the daily "X THING IS BROKEN PLZ NERF!" threads. The problem is dealing with them in a way which wont harm Eve in the long run. A lot of these fixes and feature implementations take many months if not years to finish, so while CCP are working hard to bring about the shiny new content, game changers and fixes, people are going to keep complaining as if the issue was just swept under the rug.

So really my advice is, be patient, let masses of incompetents do their thing, speak up when it is necessary and CCP should hopefully, work through these issues to bring us a "better tomorrow" Eve. Because judging by your OP, you are currently winning Eve and that's all that matters.

Staying or leaving null?

Null is very broken though.

Yup it really is, I'm looking forward to seeing what statements are made after the upcoming summit , maybe CCP/CSM will come up with some plans, maybe grab some of the ideas that have been developing on the forums because there has been some pretty interesting ones.

I've always felt that one of the biggest roadblocks for small groups in Eve has been information. A nullsec entity basically has perfect information about everything happening across their territory. It forces the "little guys" into a stand-up fight, that the little guys will pretty much never win. It's basically how insurgent style forces operate, they use lack of information as a force multiplier against their target.

Sadly, I don't really see a way for CCP to implement a "fog of war" style mechanic that would help the little guy raider/guerilla style of warfare, without giving the same amount of benefits to large blobs.

Yeah, this isn't true at all. It's just another talking point in a long line of talking points made by a certain bloc. You need only look at the new clarion call video (numerous examples of ~12 BS engaging hundreds of BC's) or any one of hundreds of other examples (like this one) to see that what you describe is simply not true.

Yes I do enjoy solo PvP too, and that's where I started pvp in this game. One account, no scout, no back up, no boost, etc. I still sometimes fly solo although I have quite a few alts now. I just log in one account and fly through low-sec and see what I can fight. Often ends up in me losing my ship, but the rush from a gf is usually worth it.




As I kinda said in the above post, I do appreciate solo playing very much. I do still stand by my comment on off-grid boosting though. Off-grid boosting is something that still requires investment in time/isk/multi-client management or at least having a friend, so I can see the justification for its reward. And when I had just one character who was trained for leadership, when he flew solo he got no boosts because he was the one with the skills and had no fleet.

Having said that though, I do think eventually removing off-grid boost and making all boosters on-grid would aspire more interesting game play, although counters already do exist for off-grid boosting such as probing them down and chasing them around to make them lose boost effectiveness. If all boosters had to be on-grid, you 'd need to make a choice a) do we shoot the probably heavily tanked booster off the field? or b) do we go for softer targets first and try to punch through the boosted reps?


As for someone who commented that they've yet to see a person flying more than one link on main - I frequently fly EOS with four links on field. It requires a CPU in the low and a command processor in the mid, but you still have room for MWD+scram+web, while having 100,000+ EHP and having almost 600 DPS in drones. In the gang size of 3~5 that I normally fly in, on-field boosting with command ship+multi links offer significant benefits.

---

In any case, that was just one particular example about links - I went into the specific because it was asked for, but I think now there's more interesting discussion developing here with smaller force vs. bigger force - how/why it's hard to compete and what it says about the game mechanic. I take people's point that maybe I used a wrong word when I said 'deserve', now I can see that perhaps I should have thought of this topic a bit differently.

As for nullblob issue, like I said in my OP I know my limits. So since this is an area of the game where others can contribute more with more meaningful comments from their own experience, I will sit back & watch with pop corn (and learn a thing or two).

Removing local in nullsec would be a good start imho :)

When sovereignty mechanics switch to an activity based model instead of the passive one we have now it will become a lot easier for smaller entities to get their foot in the door. As far as empire goes they already have a lot of tools handy as they don't have to compete with supercaps there (mostly) :)

OP: Thank-you for your observations. I'll venture to say the majority of long-term players are as you say "smaller entities." The larger groups (over the years) have been impressive, and it's obvious to "some" the amount of effort that had to go into achieving a certain amount of growth beyond that of the "average." Above all, thanks for poking your head above the surface so folks can be assured you're there. Most of my tongue-in-cheek jousting is based on the sure knowledge you, and others like you ARE there, paying your dues...and subs...keeping EVE afloat.

Generally speaking: It's wise to bear in mind when reading this forum that the "majority" of players don't post here. Most of them don't even read here. That means the most vocal here do not represent the view of the player base, as they would have some believe. For instance, an interesting stat is only 25% of the player base wants to PvP. If you listen to the mob here, which is in the end only a handful of players, the entire purpose of EVE is PvP.

It then follows, whatever "idea" they come up with to "enhance" EVE is actually tailored to just advance themselves without regard to the majority of the player base, and so how EVE is being used in the main. Many times I've said "tempest in a teapot." It's cute, sure. Shakespeare had his moments. But, it's literally true. So, these eruptions, and flare-ups fulminating from this forum are easily misunderstood in terms of the broader picture. Also, the ones doing the blustering on their own behalves have the added feature of thinking the world orbits around them. Get them all in the same room, what do you have? FANFEST!

I do think CCP caters to a small minority with regard to the ganking situation. That same small minority will now ignore the rest of this conversation and fixate on this. (Like if you threaten to take the chimp's banana away.) I believe allowing sociopaths to mischaracterize a situation, then bend policy toward them will be costly in the end. Of course, not in the immediacy (the time frame of the sociopath, by the way.) I also think CCP has some leadership in it that are like giddy little boys who will refuse to act on this - to their long-term detriment.

Ultimately - There's a lot of realize-able potential in our sandbox. I'd caution beginners to not be in a rush. You should view this "game" in terms of years, not weeks. This will not only help you keep a perspective, it'll help you enjoy your moment to moment experience in this vast space. Keep at it. The collective nature of the population's efforts will in the end characterize this environment.

The good lord willing and the creek don't rise.

Nevermind that what I meant by individual pilot skill is in having any way to effect individual outcomes.

In a flight sim for example, I can move around and dodge enemy pilots, maneuver myself into advantageous firing arcs, etc. You can do none of those things in EVE, and there is pretty much no such thing as "cover" in this game, and ships fire in a 360 degree arc across every axis.

Individual piloting skill is essentially a non factor, as far as being a primary force multiplier goes. Hence the emphasis on "force multiplier" when I say that.

Is a good FC a good force multiplier? Yes.

Is it the primary one? No. A skilled FC who is significantly outmatched in fleet comp by a less skilled FC will still lose. The primary force multiplier is not FC skill level, although it does help.