I mean what I say.
So your quote is an assumption, its not what I said, and its what youve decided it means.
Again, where did I pass judgement on a playstyle?
AHH stop itâŚ
I explained what would happen if your nightmare of the game would become reality and you insist on your dream,you further said that âsilence is better than my whiningâ after i said the game would be closed so it was totally clear what you meantâŚ
Donât row back in your boat nowâŚ
1 Like
Im not. You cant actually find where I said what my own playstyle was because I didnt tell you.
Everything you wrote, you pretty much made up based on your own biased opinion.
If you say soâŚthe posts say otherwiseâŚ
Then quote them.
Your refusal to understand my opinion is tbh irrelevent in any case.
I would even contest this. They donât keep quality customers because most of the null sec population is anything but quality. Itâs mere mindless alt quantity. The real quantities were in high sec with lots of actual players playing missions, mining, production, markets. And missions in particular were also quality because missions allowed for a lot of income but never in an unbalanced way such as super capital ratting in null sec. While you can still earn a lot of ISK with missions, missions were never in a position to break the EVE economy. Anom ratting, on the other hand, broke the economy with just 1 not fully thought through change to 2 tools to run them.
Will say: CCP chose bad quality, bad quantity over good quality, good quantity users.
2 Likes
I think they broke it previously with the Tech imbalance and the removal of the -25% ROF penalty on Destroyers to name just two events that had a major distortional impact on the game as a whole.
I happen to like these invasions and more aggressive NPCâs and it makes the game more alive, but the lack of attention to the mass of solo casuals was a major error on the part of CCP.
2 Likes
I strongly agree with the example concept that âperhaps CCP has the data, but they are drawing the wrong conclusions from itâ. It is my own belief that actually, CCP doesnât even have the proper types of decision making in place to even know what sort of data they should be trying to extract from their records and how to use that to make game design decisions.
I donât feel we, on the customer end, have enough data to conclusively say who CCP should be developing for/how they should be developing. Even though I personally have very strong opinions on what directions CCP should be taking EVE, those are based on long-term trends and observation of many MMO/gaming industry trends, not on âevidenceâ that I can point to regarding EVE (except for a few things, like the history of PCU etc).
Again, no âevidenceâ, but I feel that the direction CCP has taken EVE, especially over the last 4 years, indicates that they have decided to focus on certain client factions that bring them in the most steady income. My guess is that their metrics went something like âplayers in really big corps and alliances tend to pay us more money, start more accounts, and stay around longer than players who arenât in really big corps/alliance. Thus, clearly, if we steer the game towards needing to be in a big corp/alliance, then we will make more money!â
Putting the cart before the horse, and drawing the wrong conclusions from their own data, seems to be a CCP specialty, IMO.
1 Like
OMG ! âEVE IS DYING !!!â Itâs not as if no-one has ever claimed that beforeâŚ
1 Like
Oh look, yet another anti-ganker/CODE whiningâŚwhat a shockerâŚ
The irony of programming, not people, making things more alive for you, is shockingly shocking.
Oh look, what a shocker, your actual biases exposedâŚ
2 Likes
Oh sorry, are you anti-ganker too? So hard to tell you lazy carebears apart.
And this is why you arenât a credible commenter on any F&I threads or anything to do with game balance.
3 Likes
The problem is that your analysis sits quite well with me apart from the simple fact that by the time that they were actually looking at the data a majority of the casual solo players had already left the game due to the impact of the -25% ROF being removed from destroyers and the imbalance it caused to casual solo hisec miners. I tried to warn them on the forums, but they just did not listen, it took two and a half years before they reacted and changed the mining ships to what they are now. Prior to that all mining ships had the tank of a wet paper bag.
It was catastrophic, if only they had got that balance right in terms of tank eve would be going strong at this point.
What happened is that all those casual hisec miners instead of making slow steady progress suddenly found themselves having catastrophic losses in which their activity could not sustain, as a result they gave up.
You will often hear gankers start going on about how few frieghters get ganked, but what they donât get is that the impact of the imbalance there has a very chilling effect on the casual solo players who have no counter. It is dock up and log if your route has a bumper on the gate. Otherwise you end up being bumped for potentially hours and will likely be ganked or scam duel ganked in your desperation to get out. It turns even basic play into a lottery. I keep pushing for something to be done about this or some sort of counter for the casual solo hauler. This type of stupidity has to change.
PS @Runa_Yamaguchi, I have you blocked. You are wasting time and emotional capital in replying to me.
1 Like
More carebear whingingâŚ
Your understanding of the signifigance of this is clouded by emotion and opinion.
Dracvlad is right.
There I said it.
1 Like
You are a coward in space and in the forumsâŚno surprise thereâŚ
The problem with his whining is that he has zero data to back all his many claimed up withâŚor he says he does but that itâs in his other pantsâŚ
It would have been much better if CCP had realised quickly and adjusted it, there is nothing wrong with ganking as such, but you have to make sure that the prey side of the equation can handle it. They took their eye off the ball and the prey ended up being depleted to such a degree that there were knock on impacts. It is such a shame.
As for Runa it is amusing that he did a war dec thread complaining about having to risk a structure to do an offensive war dec.
1 Like
Yes but I was there when they tanked the hulks because they buffed destroyers.
Edit:
End result whatever way you look at it was a change was made, another change was made due to a blinkered out look on the effect of the first change and it lost pilots.
If they had tanked barges and THEN buff destroyers would your opinion be different? In the long term the outcome would probably be the same.
1 Like