EVE Information Portal

Title is king; Teams are not providing what was wanted from them. In a very rare course of action they are being removed for the health of Industry.

Head on over here to read Team Game of Drones' dev blog about it.

Give us your feedback and tell us what you think.

Why another feedback thread? The other thread had a great deal of replies already.

Mostly because a forum thread does not receive the same traffic that a blog post does, so we want to make sure that everyone gets a chance to see this.

I used teams as much as I possibly could. The minor increase in batch costs was nothing compared to the hundreds of millions saved with 2.5% ME on materials that can cost tens of billions.

The only thing that stopped me from using them as much as possible was the awful bidding system. Most of the teams were either ending in the wrong timezone or would get sniped at the very last second. If those two issues were sorted I bet you'd see a much larger uptake with teams.

-- begin irony
Excellent move!

Did you know that me (and probably others as well) turned their back on manufacturing and co. due to the excellent ideas of teams?

And now you remove them again.

Well, done!
-- end irony

Another nail in the coffin

While you are at it, please go back to the more useful industrial interface. To be sure, the new interface is "cute", but not concise.

I do some manufacturing but never had the feeling I should use teams, they seemed expensive for what they would do, and would make EVE more "spreadsheet online" for me.

I don't think it's a bad thing that they leave.

When I heard about them I thought "teams, cool, now we can manufacture together with other players", and then we got dissapointed :(

So, idea from me: "It's an MMO, make 'Teams' something with other players, like building stuff together"

I know that I for one used them extensively on large scale or large volume production projects, and found them to be quite useful.

If they're not providing benefit for certain types of jobs, or provide that benefit at a prohibitive cost, why not simply let economics sort the problem out? People will use teams on jobs and in situations that merit them, and avoid them where the benefit is not present.

If there's very low utilization, then obviously most industry is continuing in the absence of teams, so they don't represent a mandatory increase in complexity, merely one that is applicable in certain situations.

I'm really just failing to see how this is damaging to the economy as a whole. Why not just leave them in for those who use them as an extra marginal benefit to chase? For those engaged in activities that don't really benefit from teams, it's a non-issue, and those who are, it's just one more element of competition and cost-benefit to factor in.

Teams are a rarely used feature which was actually interesting and had positive consequences for everyone, so you decide to remove it?

This makes no sense whatsoever.

tl;dr: Teams were barely used, too complex, and it will be harder to yank and replace them farther down the road, so we're pulling the plug now.

Kudos on the frankness and boldness in admitting the idea didn't work out as planned. I don't think you've communicated very clearly why you had to pull the plug rather than leaving the feature in there though.