EVE General Discussion

No, you are just being deliberately obtuse. The burden in not placed on the hauler...the hauler is taking on that risk. Either out of ignorance or out of stupidity.

Edit: Also, you should stop talking about risk/reward you are clearly clueless on the topic.

I don't have it in me to deal with that place right now lol

I have only ganked during Burn Jita/Amarr events. So there goes your entire argument.

It is well past time for you to grow up, BTW.

Edit: There are also logistics and other things involved in ganking too, you know. Scouting, bumping, getting ships and ammo into position, getting people online and in fleet, etc.

And like I have said dozens of times you will not be ganked if you are prudent. Putting 8 billion ISK worth of cargo in your freighter is not prudent.

So, if I were going to create an insurance company in game here is how it would work:

Based on player data on actions, cargo, travel distance (in jumps), system security status, possibly including variables for Uedama and Niarja I’d come up with a set of contracts with premiums, deductibles and payoffs in the event of the insuree being ganked. Also, there’d be conditions in these contracts related to the maximum value of the cargo. For example, the limit, based on the above data might be 1.25 billion ISK. Anything above that the contract would be void and no payout would be given.

The idea here is that some of these provisions would be there to keep the freighter pilot from being imprudent and thus changing my levels of risk. After all, I am insuring his stuff. So I want to set some barriers to act as an incentive to protect myself which incidentally if the freighter pilot adheres too will help him too.

Now, we can’t do any of this in game because we don’t have a legal system where disputes can be resolved with some degree of consistency and objectivity. Further, given that there is no perma death and sending ships and pilots after say baltec1 for deliberately violating a contract to his benefit would do nothing but give him and his friends “content”. Granted I and my friends would also have “content” but as my wallet is not infinitely deep I could not keep this up indefinitely and I’d go broke.

But the point here is that risk can be mitigated, shared, and even transferred. Further, you can change the risk other players face as well. A point that is lost of every single person who complains about ganking. You want there to be more risk for those who engage in ganking...go impose that risk on them. A t1 fit catalyst can certainly burn down a t2 fit gank catalyst. Get an FC, get a prober, get voice comms, get the ships in Uedama, and go land in the middle of the gank fleet and gank them. Have your loot scooper come in and get what he can. Get in your t1 fit catalysts and go burn down the bumping ship.

TL;DR, every person complaining about ganking can't tell their ass from a hole in the ground when it comes to risk, risk vs. reward, and don't know what the **** risk aversion means.

Then link it. It was not said that most quit after their first paid month.

What was said, is that of the group of people that subscribe, roughly half leave within a month or so. That is not the same as the claim that most leave after their first paid month. Most never even get that far. They leave before ever paying.

But go ahead, post your link. It shouldn't be hard at all I'm sure.

There is most def. inflation and deflations in EvE. Isk is only the most common monetary goods for trade, as it is the most liquid. And that also makes it the most representetative for value of other goods.

When i started EvE Isk were not as valuable as they are today..

Monetary value or financial instruments, is closely relsted to the productivity of an economy. And in someways we could even describe different currencies in different regions. So isk has different value depending on the region your in. So WHAT you are doing as a trader is making a buck on the difference in inflation over different regions.

No not just PLEX price. For me it was mostly changes i didnt want and didnt like. Fozziesov and Phoebe was biggest reasons for me to unsub for almost two years. Ofc rising PLEX prices affected my decission aswell hard to keep multiple accounts subbed with current prices. Back when i started they were like 300mil/piece. Alltho i have always been paying customer but just cant justify or even afford to run multiple accounts with credit card. Just recently subbed one of my accounts back in game inspired by upcoming clone states. Time will show if they will be any use as "free" alt account(s) but id hope so. However im still buggered and salty about fozziesv, fatigue, phoebe and stuff. What that means for me that i have less options to do in game so no null, entosis, caps or any of that stupid crap they changed. I actually liked old sov with its structure bashes and ppl actually being able to use their expensive caps they used so long to train for. Atleast there is still lowsecs and wh's to spend time in...

Who cares? Doesnt help with all the other problems i mentioned in post above. And doesnt still make caps jump longer. Doesnt either take away fatigue or give old sov back. Besides how my adapting your business anyway? OP was asking "Every year, there are less users playing, why??" and i told my story.
So yea you go adapt as much you want i did too by unsubbing.

[quote=Yun Kuai]In my own personal opinion, I feel there are 4 main reaons why the player count is no longer at the 45k average and peaking in the 60k numbers about 5 years ago.

1) The biggest problem area is that in my almost 8 of years of playing, the game's core mechanics (read pve) are almost exactly the same as when I started. That means 8 years of grinding the same anoms, the same missions, the same mining, the same industry, the same incursions, etc.


I strongly agree with his first point. Save burner missions little has been done for pve in a long time. No matter how much you love the game, you can only grind the same anoms, missions for so long.