EVE Information Portal

it wound not they already have what im talking about at the test server now. but that one is for testing mainly.
thats why i said a new non pvp server.
i have never like to pvp on any game.
im a builder on any game and eve is my fav.
whats is it to you if a nonpvp server was made you would still have the pvp server to play on.
you worryed someone may have fun?

What we are saying Cash, is you cannot have EvE without PVP without a massive asset debt. For instance, did you know there are materials on the market that you might have bought to build things that only drop from a ship that died in PVP?

Or, who's going to buy all the things you build since ships aren't being lost, the market will quickly fill with things that no one needs? You won't be able to continue building things because you aren't making money off the things you build to be able to afford to buy mats to build new things.

Or, what you can build and sell will be very limited because there are ships that only work in PVP, they are utterly useless for PVE. There are entire classes of modules with the same issues.

To build a PVE only server, a lot of the things you deal with daily, without even knowing you deal with them, would have to rebuilt from the ground up. From introducing items that currently only drop from PVP only, all the way up to redesigning the entire combat model to make things that are currently useless for PVE to have meaning in that setting.

It is a massive debt that would have to be paid to make it possible, years of work.

You explained it - they haul less. A LOT LESS! As in, around 30 times more cargo in JF than carrier. (There's also the obvious limitation that carriers cannot go into High Sec.) And as someone else pointed out, what worked in the past is irrelevant - JF are fully entrenched in the game now, and to remove them would just wreak havoc on the economy and the supply of stuff to Low Sec.

I see where you're coming from though - you miss the fun of attacking the haulers and supply chains. But the fun does not have to stop because of JFs - in fact, I'd say theres much more fun to be had attacking the stuff that gets built with the supplies shipped in JFs. ;-)

TiDi is just one -- very visible -- aspect of an encouraging increase in the amount of resources going into refactoring and improving the existing game. The latest manifestation of this is the EVE Service Quality team, which is currently focusing on the client.

TiDi was a very broad change that needed to be done for a lot of reasons, not just to support large blobfests. And there was a marketing aspect, given EVE's reputation for lag -- which is why it got a lot of PR and why it is so easy to forget some of the other things Team Gridlock did.


This is why it is so important for the devs to engage directly with the community, and the change in tone over the last 6 months has been very encouraging. I have been pushing, and will continue to push, for more engagement, and for the devs to go direct to the relevant communities and gather feedback.

It's just good business.

Hmm... so, does this make you always right or something?

If so, then I'm probably even more right (older) than you, and everyone here should just be agreeing with all of my posts, too.

No need for separate server (agreed that the single universe concept is one of Eve's strongest features)...instead, I think the ideal solution is to revamp the existing Security Level framework to make it function as (I believe) it was originally intended.

Currently, there are really only three "levels" of space, functionally speaking: High Sec, Low Sec, and Null Sec. The specific Security Levels within each category do not mean very much, other than in relation to player sec status. That is, there's not much difference between a .8 and a .9 system in High Sec, or between .4 and .3 systems in Low Sec. (again, sec status and anchoring issues not withstanding).

The system could be reworked such that the different levels have more granularity and meaning...for example, 1.0 systems could serve as the "Ultra HS" that Malcorath suggests. In 1.0, you should not even be able to target offensive weapons (other than in a training mission or simulator). And with no risks, there should of course be no rewards - 1.0 systems would have no astroid belts to mine, no rats to kill, little or no PI, and very high taxes on market transactions.

Next you move down to .9-.8 space, which would be similar to the current HS, in that offensive weapons can be used, war targets can be shot, etc. Concord response would be near instantaneous and absolute (no escaping, same as now). Rewards get a little better too - astroid belts with low end ore, some PI, lower market taxes, etc.

Moving to .6-.7, Concord reacts much more slowly, giving suicide gankers time for more than one volley (still no escaping for the aggressor though). Rewards increase with better ores in the belts, better PI, lower taxes, and belt rats start spawning.

In .4-.5, Concord reaction is even slower, AND you have a slight chance of escaping them if you're fast/strong/skilled enough. Rewards increase correspondingly - juicy 'roids, rats, PI, etc.

.2-.3 - Concord still reacts to unauthorized aggression, but slowly and with much less force - you may even be able to destroy some of the weaker Concord vessels and escape. Rewards are very high - nearly on par with Null Sec.

Finally, in .1 systems, there is no Concord response, with similar aggression mechanics to current Low Sec, except you're not prevented from jumping/docking with aggression. Gate/station guns would still fire.

0.0 would stay the same as it is today.

Well, this is a rough idea - can no doubt use some tweaking, and probably a lot I haven't thought about, but you get the idea. Make the Security Levels meaningful. I feel this would cater better to different player's styles and risk vs. reward threshold. :)

Fair enough good sir, fair enough

I think everyone's frustrated that we finally got CCP to focus on what made this game great (FiS). They're actually fixing stuff at an almost alarming rate. Things are finally starting to work. The players, in spite of themselves, starting to actually hope again...

... and then an all-nullsec CSM tries to shift CCP's focus towards their own desires.

As a previous poster mentioned, for the first time in years I have faith in the playerbase. And my faith in CCP is growing. But after seeing these minutes, I cannot help but believe the CSM is the biggest threat to this game.

Everyone thinks the devs will read this so they are pulling out every two bit idea they ever had.

Thank you Trebor. It is encouraging to know at least one of the current council members feels this way. I can't speak for other sub-communities, but at least with Faction Warfare the general wishes / desires of those who have paid to engage in that feature all these years should be pretty clear by now. That was the point of consolidating feedback into the threadnought, encouraging the community to keep their comments into the one thread for convenience purposes, and directly contacting the council with our wishes for the future. That, combined with the strong, almost unanimous opposition to the proposed plan discussed in the summit minutes, means that there is now officially no excuse for CCP or the CSM, for that matter, to say "we didn't know".

All is laid out on the table for the developers to see. We will no doubt keep the debates going (not all of us agree on the details, even if we all agree that FW is about small-scale, frequent PvP and not about Alliance emulation.) but part of that is that the discussions continue to generate some really solid solutions and ideas. The Dev's don't have to pull ideas out of a vacuum - players have already generated many excellent solutions worthy of discussion.

CCP Developers have all the tools in front of them they need to fully restore FW to its original vision and glory - a haven for casual, easy to get into, frequent PvP skirmishes, without the hassle and resource management needed to operate at the Alliance level. Whether they listen to us at this point is on them.

You are absolutely right, this is all about good business in the end - there are a couple thousand subscriptions that are dedicated FW players, and many more that are biding their time to see if CCP makes the right move and develops the feature with respect to what is important to the community. Countless more have quit the game waiting for this to come around, and might come back if FW gets fixed properly.

I hope CCP thinks about the isk, in the end - and realizes they just can't afford NOT to listen to their paying customers and propose plans for the future that ultimately will alienate the devoted pilots who have put the time into making FW fun all these years.

CCP probably feels they ARE listening to the community by hearing out the CSM. I just hope that they understand that like you said, sometimes even the CSM doesn't have the answers and that there's other experts they can rely on for advice within the community.