Out of Pod Experience

^^This^^ Pay to win aside, if Dust doesn't have absolutely stellar and addictive gameplay it will fizzle out extremely fast. I also think it would have a much better chance for success if released for PC, but that's not happening. Many like myself won't give it a chance for that reason alone.

Since day 1, they have said that EVE will continue to work without Dust and vice versa, so there won't be anything to prop up.

well... this sounds like the common mmo.

…which has worked quite nicely in the past. So why is it going to fail?

In particular, why would it fail, now that FPSes increasingly have a similar pay scheme without being MMOs (and MMOs increasingly having a similar pay scheme without being FPSes)? Both genres are headed in towards the same middle point…

Midnight Sparkle?

Of course, they could just phase out DUST 1 and make EVE PI dependent on "DUST 2"
Keep the same framework that allows eve interaction but just replace the actual game.

Moved from General Discussion.

won't EVE players be able to fund their Dust character with isk, one game to the other, in some manner?
seems to me that if you pay your EVE sub, that's all you ever need to pay, which makes playing Dust even more attractive.

Its like a train wreck happening in slow motion....

In answer to your question: variable - it all depends on the player in question. Some player might throw in the towel as soon as the warning sirens light up. Others might decide to make it their personal vendetta to destroy you so absolutely that all you have in the game is your rookie ship and a piece of Tritanium. To the mercenaries who know their stuff though? It wouldn't matter. They would find a way to get the job done and move on. Don't forget, they're not exactly toothless themselves, and they're certainly not without means to strike back through other EVE players. The meta-game works both ways after all.

As to why EVE players would be disgruntled, there are several reasons I can come up with, as well as many I haven't.

1. Some people believe that the subscriptions that pay for EVE, should go into EVE and nothing else. These people will bombard planets into oblivion to punish DUST 514 for even existing off the back of EVE in the first place.
2. Other people are angry that DUST 514 isn't for Xbox 360. Others have issue with it being a console game, and it bringing "console kiddies" into EVE, which we all like to think of as having a much more mature player base.
3. Some people don't like that the established order is being disrupted. They're comfortable with what they know, and they don't want any changes. I mean, normally people whine when CCP change small game mechanics. They pour rage when they change see Dominion scale changes. Bolting a new game onto EVE? That's like trying to put out a fire by throwing it in a pool of petrol to these people.
4. And then there are those that think that DUST 514 will be a failure. They're so convinced that it will never live up to the competition that they will do everything in their power to see their prophecy come true.

Might add that it's not as simple to use orbital bombardment as you think. So far, the all the indications we have point towards it being used in a tactical sense, not strategic. You can't just carpet bomb the hell out of a planet just to kill a couple of console kids. You've got to get someone on the other team to pick a target before the shells come down. Through this, I'm pretty sure there will be limitations that prevent one side from just parking a single battleship or dreadnought in orbit and shutting down the entire battlefield. I'm guessing timers between shots (on both ends - reactivation delays on the module to bombard and a cool down on the designator, maybe even a global cooldown for the team). That or a cost in warpoints for each salvo.

Not to mention that as long as you're in orbit and shooting at the planet, you're a valid target to be shot back at. If the trailer is any indication, some of the skyfire batteries compare in power to a titan's doomsday. Even if it has half that power, that's still a serious punch. And you know those shields and armour plates that you have protecting your ship, preventing it from being vaporised in one shot? Don't be surprised if you see planetary installations with similar if not more powerful shields and armour. Heck, I could see shield projectors protecting areas of the battlefield, absorbing damage until you either deplete them with fire(takes a while) or sabotage the reactors on the ground (you don't think they'll be stupid enough to make the classic mistake of putting the generators on the outside, do you?)

That's enough from me for now. It's 2:45am, and I should be asleep. If you have more, I'll address them tomorrow.

EDIT: I'll admit though, it's an important question you ask. Should they fail to create the balance between the planets and the stars, I can see some room for problems. But that holds true for any poorly designed game mechanic. Just look at super carriers until they hit them with the nerf bat. I honestly hope that people do keep asking these questions so that CCP makes sure to answer them. And well.