Missions & Complexes

1. good job nitpicking my response instead of a serious rebuttal.
2. not everyone is aware of the fact that you're supposed to warp away as soon as your ship explodes
3. smartbombs


yes, please tell me how i'm supposed to play this game! how would i know what is fun unless you tell me? so you have to get your ship blown up and then spend minutes/hours days warping around to get a new one? wow, thanks for the advice pal.


...because the only way to have fun is the way you do it, right? news flash: not everyone is interested in pvp, or combat in general. also, not everyone is able or willing to pay real money for blowing up spaceships.

taking significantly higher risks for the same rewards does not make you a hero. it makes you stupid.

It is true that the CSM pretty much represents the more hardcore players. Those who spend excessive amounts of time playing.
They advocate things wanted by those players.

Changes to null sec mechanics, changes to POS mechanics, Ship balancing, etc.

The CSM has its purpose and uses but does not in any way control CCP or what they decide to do in the end. Was there anyone in CSM calling for an updated inventory system before the unified inventory was released??

CCP has tools and spread sheets that give them a very detailed break down of how many accounts the game has, what accounts are active, how active those accounts are, what players do when they are logged in, how player activity is affected by released updates, even what accounts are active on the forums and websites, and many many other important data records that are the primary driver for the decisions made by CCP. The player input from the CSM is only one small factor in the equation.

You need to realize that only a very small portion of the player base is actually active on the forums. CCP uses this other information they have available to determine the needs of those who are not active on the forums, or giving input to the CSM.

Although EVE is very unique as an MMO the basics are still the same. every successful MMO has a large PVE(carebear) Player base that provides up to 80% of the income for the game. Most hardcore gamers are PVPers as being a carebear quickly gets boring if you are spending +20 hours a week playing the game. These hardcore players (PVPers) however are generally the most vocal and most active players in the game. Keeping them happy is crucial to any MMO games success. bored PVPers either quit the game or become gankers, this leads to lower game population and more carebear frustration, which inturn leads to more players leaving the game. It is this downward spiral that causes most MMO games to fall after a few years of popularity. Even WOW, the biggest MMO ever released, is only a shadow of what it used to be population wise.

As much as game developers work to keep the vocal (PVP) community happy. They will not risk losing the PVE community suport as this provides up to 80% of their income. High sec life in EVE will always be a carebears haven. This will never change. If CCP ever did open up high sec to the PVPers making it even easier to gank the carebears it would destroy the game as most true carebears would rather quit the game than be forced into PVP. CCP knows this, and I am sure it was a major factor in the decision to buff the mining ships.

EVE would not be EVE without at least some level of risk even in the highest security systems of high sec, but they are not about to **** of 80% of the player base just to give the 20% PVPers free reign. The players who wnat to PVP will go to where the PVP is. The players who do not want to PVP will quit rather than be forced to PVP. This is a fact no matter what MMO you are playing.

http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=28529
"There were 59,109 votes cast by eligible voters, amassing a turnout of 16.63%. This means that this election once again saw record voter turnout. Of the total votes cast, 563 (0.95%) chose to abstain. This is the lowest number of abstains of any CSM election so far. The CSM6 election saw 659 (1.34%) abstains."

Thanks for that. He rolled up the numbers for CSM7 in paragraph form that I'd probably skimmed over in favour of point form, mea culpa.
*I failed at reading*

Where was this suggestion made?


I haven't heard about moving slots to low/null, but I wouldn't be surprised if hisec were to lose some manufacturing slots after nullsec gets its industrial side buffed heavily. If they do, then I'd say there's a good reason for it: hisec has a ton of manufacturing slots, and most of them are very cheap.

Invention/copying I thought was mostly done in POSes anyways, in hisec.


I've no idea where you've got the limits on how long you can stay in an NPC corp , I'd love to see a link to that. That sounds like an unrealistic request made by someone who's trolling or can't see further than his nose. As to barring NPC corp members from flying ships like freighters, transports etc, while that would be hilarious (and easy as all hell to circumvent vOv), the reason I've seen that come up (and hell, I've even trolled with it myself, just to see if I could make the person going down that road see how silly it is; I don't think it worked) has primarily been unwardecable freighter pilots and mackinaw/hulks etc. So if CCP does implement this, you can lay the blame on the rich NPC corpmates who regularly freighter around large volumens of expensive ****, and your cosy NPC corp icemining mack/hulk.

Personally I wouldn't go :ohdear: over that idea existing, as I don't think it'll happen; it's not sandboxy, and it'd be ******** as all hell if you were kicked out of some corp and suddenly you can't fly a large chunk of your ships.


IIRC that was because CCP didn't like passive incomes.

Then, of course, they managed to completely **** up FW and turn it into farmville, but there you go. vOv


There are good reasons for that, actually. Hisec has too much for too little, it's part of the nullsec depopulation problem, and every time CCP has tried to buff f.ex nullsec to the point where people stop running L4s, they end up panicking and nerfing it near into uselessness again, and people move back to running L4s instead.

@ Lord Zim:

I can't provide links to all those things, these are just the things I remember off the top of my head. I'm not Tippia or Malcanis or any of the "professional" forum warriors, I don't keep catalogs of threads/posts bookmarked (and even if I did, I've wrecked two hard drives in the last 4 years - pays to buy better quality! ).

Limits on residency in NPC corps has been booted around at *least* the last four years, I remember reading that one back when I was in the Uni (Mar-Nov 2008). I've also seen other suggestions on POS's, invention and copying, again, specifics lost in the mists of my memory.

As for "not being able to fly a large chunk of your ships" - I think the idea was to go from XYZ Corp to "Joe Schmo's Corp - Population 1" or something, i.e., *NOT* going back to an NPC corp.

As for Hi-Sec having too much, I propose that Null-Sec has too little... But yeah, #1, I'm ok with the current rebalancing, #2, Null sec *NEEDS* to not *HAVE* to depend on Hi-Sec so much (especially Industry - that's pants-on-head stupid) #3, I was really trying to show the person I quoted that yes, Hi-Sec *has* been nerfed, and *yes* there is constant talk about many other things to boot.

Wish I had links to all that, maybe some of it was trolling - but iirc, all of it is true.

My friend, this is why they will not vote.

CSM is a community team. You can talk to them, you know, suggest ideas and tell them your opinion.

What makes you think lowsec risk/reward is messed up?

As a high-sec mission runner, I'd love to see low and null buffed, giving me a reason to actually want to go there.

For most solo players, low/null is all risk no reward. High sec, however, is fine.