These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Every year, there are less users playing, why??

First post
Author
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#701 - 2016-08-01 16:41:16 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:

My dear boy, the Skiff has a lower base yield then the Mackinaw and Hulk, that is why in areas where CODE are too lazy to operate you see them. But most people who go for yield go for the Retreiver as Brokk quite rightly pointed out, it is cheap too and the yield will make a big enough difference over a couple of hours to more than pay for its inability to tank a single Catalyst....


Which illiterates my point, the barge balance was a bad one as ships like the covetor are relegated to the bin.
Brokk Witgenstein
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#702 - 2016-08-01 16:44:50 UTC
Nah. I have a covetor with only two strip miners because I like the third slot for a cloak.

Doesn't really matter as CCP has a barge rebalance in the pipeline, but do you know what I really miss? The scythe of olde. A proper cruiser with mining capabilities. There might be a niche for armed haulers and armed miners... guess we'll have to wait and see on that one.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#703 - 2016-08-01 16:45:08 UTC
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:

There is a reason Skiffs mine in flocks. On its own, it is indeed quite dead quite fast.


Skiff gets more tank than some fully fitted cruisers right out of the box. They are anything but easily killable.
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
#704 - 2016-08-01 16:49:05 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:


There is a rotten smell and it is not just coming from Jenn's megaphone...


and that means exactly what?

the shite you peddle doesn't smell, only everyone elses?


So what is your view on how the wreck EHP of freighters got changed to 15,000 EHP from 500 EHP, was it done with the purest of intentions, or was it because the AG was starting to gank wrecks, answers on a post card. To help in your journey of discovery you will find thet the person who jumped on to this was Endie whose corp was at one time the biggest industrial gankers in Eve.

He may be a paton saint of Eve for all I know, but the timing looks rather suspect, so if my feeling that this was a bit of a fix to favour the gankers smalls then it sure does smell.


why side track from the reality that people who do not fly in a manner that promotes their survival is the issue here and not the ehp of a wreck. 500 ehp on freighter wreck is very very low so perhaps it was an update that was coming anyway.

Everyone is aware of the dangers of being ganked but they decide to take chances, that's their decision, sometimes they get away with it and think yea i got this until they go pop.

some rethink and change their plan, others jump on the forums and demand they be heard and changes made.


xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
#705 - 2016-08-01 16:50:29 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:

There is a reason Skiffs mine in flocks. On its own, it is indeed quite dead quite fast.


Skiff gets more tank than some fully fitted cruisers right out of the box. They are anything but easily killable.


yup,, and a well fit one can hit 120k hit points easy.

but working in a fleet does add support. that's a given.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#706 - 2016-08-01 16:53:11 UTC
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:

There is a reason Skiffs mine in flocks. On its own, it is indeed quite dead quite fast.


Skiff gets more tank than some fully fitted cruisers right out of the box. They are anything but easily killable.


yup,, and a well fit one can hit 120k hit points easy.

but working in a fleet does add support. that's a given.


Oh true, a gang of these things can be downright nasty.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#707 - 2016-08-01 16:55:51 UTC
Lucy Lollipops wrote:
That sentence is becoming the ever-green exxcuse to justify this ganking/wardec mechanics, too easy.

I would love to have CCP removing some fit slots on every mining/hauling ship and integrate warp core stabs and a much stronger EHP on ships.

Just to force gankers to use 4/5 ships for the ganking.

No one complains for organized multi/ship ganking even in hisec, as no one complains if he lose expensive/big ships in wormhole or nullsec to small gangs/fleet.

It's something acceptable for anyone.

Free one ship ganking is totally different.....and the excuse for it is always the same "hisec not 100% sure"...


Yes, HS is not 100% has always been this way. People like you whine for changes and the law of unintended consequences keeps biting you in the ass and you just don't learn.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#708 - 2016-08-01 16:57:11 UTC
Geronimo McVain wrote:
Lucy Lollipops wrote:
That sentence is becoming the ever-green exxcuse to justify this ganking/wardec mechanics, too easy.

I would love to have CCP removing some fit slots on every mining/hauling ship and integrate warp core stabs and a much stronger EHP on ships.

That's not really the problem. If you do your math you can kill any ship with almost 100% success rate. It must become unreliable so that you may, and just may, get away with less effort and on other occasions you will fail even with a lot more effort. Give E-War bonusses to freighters and industrials for burst jammers and target breakers.


It is a two way street dude. Yes, if you do your math right and the other guy doesn't, then you are assured a kill. You are the other guy not doing your math right. Fix it. Do the math right.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#709 - 2016-08-01 17:00:24 UTC
Lucy Lollipops wrote:
"Being able to ruin somebodies day is one of the cornerstones of Eve, hisec is not exempt from that cornerstone and CCP Falcons statement reflects it."

Maybe if you make it very easy for players that love to ruin somebodies day so they can do it on a industrial scale the result is that you have less users playing....

maybe...


Let me see....

1. You have to first herd dozens of cats (get that fleet formed).
2. You have to get some guy who is good at bumping.
3. You have to set up voice comms.
4. You have to have a logistics network to get stuff where your cats in point 1 can use it.
5. You have to find an idiot.
6. Gank.

If you look at just 6 or maybe even 5 & 6 yeah, it looks easy. Note, I am skipping things like setting up corporations, alliances, the stuff to check APIs, etc.

Maybe you should try ganking. See what is involved vs. spouting off and displaying your ignorance for everyone to see.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#710 - 2016-08-01 17:03:08 UTC
Giovanni erkelens2 wrote:
NotTheSmartestCookie wrote:


If I want to roleplay I always imagine myself dispensing justice in a Judge-Dread-like fashion vs rapacious mining companies and their lick-spittle henchmen. Invariably these mining cartels are guilty of a combination of the following: 1> wholesale environmental destruction, 2> tax/permit evasion and 3> using illegal AI to run their operations. Small wonder it always feels good to be in CODE.



1: wholesale environmental destruction, lol, dude, really ?
2: thats what player corporations are for, to benefit their ceo and members, with or without taxes, nobody is forced to pay taxes, neither it is mandatory, as for permits, they werent there in the first place, its just something you tools made up, nobody should be forced to purchase something from a third party to make optimal use of a primary gameplay element.
3: at least something relevant comes out of you, on this i agree, using Bots to mine non stop, or doing whatever else in that case is unfair to everyone, and creates unfair competition.


Its role playing lighten up. Roll

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Lucy Lollipops
State War Academy
Caldari State
#711 - 2016-08-01 17:07:36 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Lucy Lollipops wrote:
"Being able to ruin somebodies day is one of the cornerstones of Eve, hisec is not exempt from that cornerstone and CCP Falcons statement reflects it."

Maybe if you make it very easy for players that love to ruin somebodies day so they can do it on a industrial scale the result is that you have less users playing....

maybe...


Let me see....

1. You have to first herd dozens of cats (get that fleet formed).
2. You have to get some guy who is good at bumping.
3. You have to set up voice comms.
4. You have to have a logistics network to get stuff where your cats in point 1 can use it.
5. You have to find an idiot.
6. Gank.

If you look at just 6 or maybe even 5 & 6 yeah, it looks easy. Note, I am skipping things like setting up corporations, alliances, the stuff to check APIs, etc.

Maybe you should try ganking. See what is involved vs. spouting off and displaying your ignorance for everyone to see.


I think situation is quite different.

Situation is that CCP prefers to keep it ambiguous.

HS miners keep mining in unrealistical ships.

Gankers keep killing some of them in a unrealistical scenario.

At the end of the joke gankers only scratch a little part of the ISKs that transit in Hisec, and it's still more than enough to keep them well feeded and to let them plex a lot for free.

It's like the mosquitoes, fat mosquitoes draining some blood but not killing anyone because the number are low compared to the total of players.

It's pretty sad honestly, and it can made realistic assumptions related to the preference of some game developers to them for reasons I don't personally know nor care.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#712 - 2016-08-01 17:07:54 UTC
Giovanni erkelens2 wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Lucy Lollipops wrote:
"Being able to ruin somebodies day is one of the cornerstones of Eve, hisec is not exempt from that cornerstone and CCP Falcons statement reflects it."

Maybe if you make it very easy for players that love to ruin somebodies day so they can do it on a industrial scale the result is that you have less users playing....

maybe...
Hisec is mechanically safer than it ever has been, if you don't do something daft. Suicide ganking has never been more labour intensive and expensive, war has never offered such a poor return on investment; the only reason that there is any risk left in hisec is that the people who provide it have adapted to each and every change that sought to curtail their activities.

Can flipping is gone.
Awoxing is for all intents and purposes gone as it can be simply avoided by flipping a "switch"
The safety catch was implemented to stop people accidentally flagging themselves for Concordokken.
Concord response times have been buffed, as have their ships.
Crimewatch 2.0 simplified the confusing maze that used to be hisec aggression mechanics, and allows anybody to shoot a suspect.
Mining ships have been changed to offer choice.
Haulers have been changed to offer choice.
Insurance has been removed from ships used to gank.
War has never been more expensive or hard to prosecute.
Suicide ganking is now an expensive and labour intensive activity.

TL;DR You're safer than you have ever been. God help you if Helicity shows up and organises another epic event to show you how unsafe it can be with a big wallet and a concerted effort by hundreds of players.


suicide ganking isnt expensive, nor it is labour intensive, unless you target big frieghters, but even then its simple and doesnt require much more effort than steering a ship and pressing a button. as for solo ganking, all u do is to sit in some spot, wait for a target to come in, and press a button and poof, done. target gone.

awoxing isnt gone, only for corp hopping awoxers, awoxing corps can still do whatever they want.


Depends. If I want to suicide gank miners I can do it without alot of labor--i.e. I can get a t3 battle cruiser and gank away....and lose ISK.

Or I can expend effort and maybe gank for profit with a group.

So you are simply wrong. Go ahead, try it. Try ganking for profit. Start a group and go out and do it. Come back and tell us if it was "easy" or required more effort than you thought.

1. You'll need a corporation (at least).
2. You'll likely need voice comms.
3. You'll need some sort of logistics (when your gankers get sec status so low you'll need to provide them with ships).
4. You'll need to set up communications like jabber or slack so you can send out messages on when fleets will be forming. You can rely on in-game mail, but it will be less helpful.
5. Set up some sort of API check so you can at least try to reduce your risk of being scammed and robbed.
6. You'll need people to scout.
7. You'll need people to bump if you are going after haulers.
8. And you'll need an FC, maybe more than one so you can avoid burn out and still provide content to your members.

Tell me where on that list I am wrong.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#713 - 2016-08-01 17:11:42 UTC
NotTheSmartestCookie wrote:
Lucy Lollipops wrote:
That sentence is becoming the ever-green exxcuse to justify this ganking/wardec mechanics, too easy.

I would love to have CCP removing some fit slots on every mining/hauling ship and integrate warp core stabs and a much stronger EHP on ships.

Just to force gankers to use 4/5 ships for the ganking.

No one complains for organized multi/ship ganking even in hisec, as no one complains if he lose expensive/big ships in wormhole or nullsec to small gangs/fleet.

It's something acceptable for anyone.

Free one ship ganking is totally different.....and the excuse for it is always the same "hisec not 100% sure"...


An extra-EHP mining barge, I guess we could call it a Procurer.

A quick view on the forum will show you that there is an extra-ordinary amount of whining not only about barges/exhumers being ganked, but also about multi-ship ganking vs freighters. An analysis of the killmails will show that most of the victims did not take advantage of the various buffs offered by CCP, but still fit for max yield or hauling capacity. Note however that the whiners don't call for better fitting tutorials, but just for more buffs for miners and nerfs to gankers.

In any case CCP has already announced another round of buffs for mining barges (details pending). Unfortunately this seems to have thrown the miner-whine-train into overdrive.


FYI, I looked at the ganks for retrievers and skiffs for July 26. Went to zkill and copied and pasted the data into excel. I removed LS and NS kills. For retrievers there were 33 kills. There might have been some war dec kills in there, I did not check, so that is an upper bound. For skiffs there were 2 HS deaths, these I did look at since there were only 2 and those both looked very much like war decs. Skiffs also had a number of kills on there as well.

So Lucy is just an ignoramus. Literally. You want more safety, get in a skiff, or its T1 variant, the procuror. Both can fit substantial tank and can be a nasty surprise for somebody not expecting tanked skiffs or procurors. Put them in a group with combat boosts and they are nastier.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#714 - 2016-08-01 17:14:28 UTC
Lucy Lollipops wrote:


I think situation is quite different.

Situation is that CCP prefers to keep it ambiguous.

HS miners keep mining in unrealistical ships.

Gankers keep killing some of them in a unrealistical scenario.

At the end of the joke gankers only scratch a little part of the ISKs that transit in Hisec, and it's still more than enough to keep them well feeded and to let them plex a lot for free.

It's like the mosquitoes, fat mosquitoes draining some blood but not killing anyone because the number are low compared to the total of players.

It's pretty sad honestly, and it can made realistic assumptions related to the preference of some game developers to them for reasons I don't personally know nor care.


I'm sorry but you are just flat out ignorant. Do you have any idea of how big the tank can be on a skiff? How about north of 100,000 ehp? Considerably more with combat boosts.

And if it is like mosquitoes, do the smart thing and do the in game variant of applying some bug repellant, stop whining to mommy (CCP) about the mosquitoes. Learn to fend for yourself.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Pandora Carrollon
Provi Rapid Response
#715 - 2016-08-01 17:14:56 UTC
Drav-

No, I get your point and am not offended by it. I also get the CODE point as well.

My only issue with CODE is the concept of 'ownership/change of HiSec' or the 'right' to just ruin someone elses game play for the sake of some RP fantasy that is simply a justification to be a jerk for being a jerks sake. I actually don't care much about the play style as long as the people behind the play style don't swallow the Kool-Aid so much that they actually believe the garbage they try to sell to everyone else. Propaganda is fine, actually believing your own propaganda is dangerous to you and everyone around you.

As to HiSec AFK miners, CODE has a point... to a point. It's a valid play style if you accept the idea that all play styles are valid. Is it 'good' for the game... eh, that's a matter of perspective, james' zombie corps says it's bad but frankly it doesn't bother me at all since it's so low profit. Is it good for the 'player' choosing to do this? No, that's probably where CODE is dead on correct but it can be argued that the CODE play style is just as damaging as the AFK mining one, which is exactly what you've been arguing.

Where I think you're making a mistake is trying to link it to new player loss. I just don't see the evidence to support the idea that ganking causes massive player loss. It's actually so rare, that it would get lost in just the statistical noise of player loss so it's almost impossible to quantify. Yeah, we can be pretty certain SOMEONE has left the game due to it, but if that's countered by 100 people leaving the game due to the games complexity... it's basically a moot point.

Look, the common ground here is that if we all agree that HiSec should not be 100% safe, then it's just an issue as to what degree of safety should exist and who protects that safety factor.

I personally think HiSec is okay as is with the new bumping limit. You can't bug someone for 15 minutes straight, multiple times during a run. That puts a limit on the obnoxiousness of people. Personally, I think it could've been done differently, like instead of instawarping, maybe after 3 minutes of bumping, the target ship is given Kill Rights on all the ships within 100km of it. It can either open fire (with no Concord interference and the other ships DON'T get to do that, they either have to leave or suicide gank the target) or give other pilots in the area the kill rights and let them come take them out for the target.

There are a lot of ways to balance this out, but arguing this for 35+ pages is a little silly.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#716 - 2016-08-01 17:15:12 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
So to put things into context the Skiff gets 26.1k ehp (without any skills or mods), the oracle battlecruiser only gets 8.33k ehp and the Scorpion battleship only has 1.4k more ehp.

That is utterly bonkers.

A more realistic number would be around the 7k ehp mark which puts it on par with a combat recon and then give it more fitting slots and up the CPU and PG so that you can fit it reasonably but not enough so that you can fit the best of everything, just like every other ship. The bonuses too make little sense, its supposed to be the more brawler of bunch so why give it a 150% bonus to strip miner yield? All that does is cut into the draw of getting a hulk which should be the go to ship for yield. Lose that bonus and the hulk become much more viable an option than today. It doesn't need 3 bonuses.

The ore bay is equally a bad idea, it means you can do nothing to expand your hold to take in more ore which means less options. We should be giving people as many options as possible with ships. Frankly this change seems to only be there to stop people from hurting themselves. Lastly, I honestly think these ships should be armour tank. Why? Because making them armour tankers means they are forced to make hard choices between tank, capacity and yield in the same way that people such as myself are forced to chose between tank, firepower, speed, application and so on. People making hard choices, even if they are bad ones, is good for the game.

And for those of us who are curious, a Skiff with one Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar mining crystal II and two Mining laser II will net you 20.1 units a second.

A hulk with three Modulated Strip Miner II, Veldspar mining crystal II and one Mining laser II will net 26.31 units a second.

So honestly, why bother with a hulk?
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#717 - 2016-08-01 17:22:58 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
So to put things into context the Skiff gets 26.1k ehp (without any skills or mods), the oracle battlecruiser only gets 8.33k ehp and the Scorpion battleship only has 1.4k more ehp.

That is utterly bonkers.

A more realistic number would be around the 7k ehp mark which puts it on par with a combat recon and then give it more fitting slots and up the CPU and PG so that you can fit it reasonably but not enough so that you can fit the best of everything, just like every other ship. The bonuses too make little sense, its supposed to be the more brawler of bunch so why give it a 150% bonus to strip miner yield? All that does is cut into the draw of getting a hulk which should be the go to ship for yield. Lose that bonus and the hulk become much more viable an option than today. It doesn't need 3 bonuses.

The ore bay is equally a bad idea, it means you can do nothing to expand your hold to take in more ore which means less options. We should be giving people as many options as possible with ships. Frankly this change seems to only be there to stop people from hurting themselves. Lastly, I honestly think these ships should be armour tank. Why? Because making them armour tankers means they are forced to make hard choices between tank, capacity and yield in the same way that people such as myself are forced to chose between tank, firepower, speed, application and so on. People making hard choices, even if they are bad ones, is good for the game.



No, what is really bonkers is despite this these Bads™ do not use the ship and do not fit a tank. And they still show up here and whine and cry and complain. CCP has handed them to tools to make ganking mining ships quite difficult (the procuror also has a damn impressive tank as well) and yet these people refuse to use them. Now that is bonkers, IMO.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#718 - 2016-08-01 17:24:19 UTC
Pandora Carrollon wrote:


I personally think HiSec is okay as is with the new bumping limit. You can't bug someone for 15 minutes straight, multiple times during a run. That puts a limit on the obnoxiousness of people. Personally, I think it could've been done differently, like instead of instawarping, maybe after 3 minutes of bumping, the target ship is given Kill Rights on all the ships within 100km of it. It can either open fire (with no Concord interference and the other ships DON'T get to do that, they either have to leave or suicide gank the target) or give other pilots in the area the kill rights and let them come take them out for the target.


Yes because rewarding imprudence and foolishness is always good. Roll

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Lucy Lollipops
State War Academy
Caldari State
#719 - 2016-08-01 18:01:51 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Lucy Lollipops wrote:


I think situation is quite different.

Situation is that CCP prefers to keep it ambiguous.

HS miners keep mining in unrealistical ships.

Gankers keep killing some of them in a unrealistical scenario.

At the end of the joke gankers only scratch a little part of the ISKs that transit in Hisec, and it's still more than enough to keep them well feeded and to let them plex a lot for free.

It's like the mosquitoes, fat mosquitoes draining some blood but not killing anyone because the number are low compared to the total of players.

It's pretty sad honestly, and it can made realistic assumptions related to the preference of some game developers to them for reasons I don't personally know nor care.


I'm sorry but you are just flat out ignorant. Do you have any idea of how big the tank can be on a skiff? How about north of 100,000 ehp? Considerably more with combat boosts.

And if it is like mosquitoes, do the smart thing and do the in game variant of applying some bug repellant, stop whining to mommy (CCP) about the mosquitoes. Learn to fend for yourself.


Mosquitoes is referred to the fact they only gank a very little part of all the mining/hauling ships that are scattered across hisec so even if the amount makes them rich in term of isks, they could be thousand times richer if they could gank all ( obviously I'm saying just for example) the mining/hauling ships around.

So it's basically something that can be tollerated by ccp stuff, they make players to be annoyed and they contribute to make Eve have the fame of a mmo full of ***ks ( or better, the only mmo where they can have much fun ) but it's only part of what is maybe affecting the player base.

Just to give you an example I don't spend all my time in hisec mining, maybe I spend like 20 hours/week in total when I'm not wardecced but I never experienced a single gank in about 6 months.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#720 - 2016-08-01 18:13:39 UTC
Lucy Lollipops wrote:


Mosquitoes is referred to the fact they only gank a very little part of all the mining/hauling ships that are scattered across hisec so even if the amount makes them rich in term of isks, they could be thousand times richer if they could gank all ( obviously I'm saying just for example) the mining/hauling ships around.


My guess is they can't. Such a thing would be self-defeating in the end, even if they could pull it off, and trust me when mining ships had much less tank AND we had Hulkaggedon (a contest over a period of time to see who could gank the most mining ships) not all mining ships were ganked.

Quote:
So it's basically something that can be tollerated by ccp stuff, they make players to be annoyed and they contribute to make Eve have the fame of a mmo full of ***ks ( or better, the only mmo where they can have much fun ) but it's only part of what is maybe affecting the player base.


You need to stop this. It is misleading and contrary to public statements by CCP Devs. That is, they don't tolerate it, they see this kind of thing as a feature.

Quote:
Just to give you an example I don't spend all my time in hisec mining, maybe I spend like 20 hours/week in total when I'm not wardecced but I never experienced a single gank in about 6 months.


Then where is the problem? Ganking, by your own admission, is small compared to the entire population. You yourself haven't been ganked in 6 months. This does not looking like a raging problem. CCP's own analysis of "new players" shows that about 1% are ganked in their first 90 days....and they tend to stay with the game longer than those not ganked. Now with all averages, there will be some who stay less because they were ganked, but still this is, at best, a contributing factor to people leaving the game and quite possibly a small one.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online