Bigger is NOT Better... for EVE

I appreciate your points…I support many of them. CCP’s vision is one of greed right now. The problem with game worlds like this one is they are profit driven, and imho that’s the full stop.

The right idea to sustain and support social communities will always be thwarted by the asshat in the corner with an idea that will milk a few extra dollars out of the player base.

If CCP really cared about a quality community the F2P element would be shut off and only pilots who really wanted to be here would be.

1 Like

I agree, and that topic is always ripe for discussion although prob on a separate thread of its’ own. I often harp about EVE/CCP and poor game design, and people keep telling me “nope the game design is fine it’s just that players are bad at it”, but Fozzie Sov is one of EVE’s poster children for bad design.

Your post starts with saying “the problem isn’t just Bigger is Better”, but actually every paragraph pretty much just re-states that it is. Pushing players into Null for ‘more more more’, setting up the biggest donut farm, introducing the next bigger ship as brokenly OP, and finally “EVE worked better when things were smaller”. You introduce human nature, the valid desire to maximize etc., but all that just means “If you give me bigger tools, I will use them to make bigger piles”, but that doesn’t actually result in a ‘better’ game.

Thank you for the perspective.

Skill injectors may well be a problem, but as they didn’t exist until 2016, long after the decline of EVE, it seems unlikely they’re the core problem.

That seems like the sort of thing CCP would come up with - cheesy, easy, and most of all, benefits the largest groups to the detriment of the smallest. The concept of making the ‘increased cost’ a limited supply mini-game might be workable, especially if it was a ‘per corp’ limit. Although I suspect huge corps would then just fracture into alliances of smaller corps - which might also be useful. Interesting thoughts, thank you!

You’re actually missing the notion of ‘pressure from CCP’ here. When you herd things to a set destination, you aren’t issuing an ultimatum “Join this or suffer!”. You use a series of nerfs and benefits, such that the natural inclination of a great many players is to seek out the maximum game benefit.

In EVE, the rewards all scale in such a way that ‘maximum rewards’ leads to Null, trying to obtain those rewards leads to needing the biggest alliances with the most ships, Fozzie Sov leads to long, boring activity to ‘own’ that space, farming that space and protecting it leads to mass fleets of Rorqs, Caps and Supercaps, as well as hordes of semi-AFK farmers and bounty miners.

Not everyone will fall into the same trap, because not everyone has “I need to have the most power and the most stuff” as a goal. But one look at either EVE or RL is enough to tell you… most people do.

I mentioned this earlier, but your post is good. I don’t mind at all if CCP goes for profit. I just believe they went for the easiest, most short-sighted method for it. “Let’s introduce OP stuff that makes people sub longer and sub more alts to get it, and make money off the extra subs and Plex sales”, and then made the process even worse with things like Skill Injectors.

They could have gone the route of “let’s build a much more interesting, better designed game”, but it seems that everyone who was capable of decent design at CCP saw the writing on the wall of how the beancounters were taking over, and bailed before 2011-ish. Since 2009-ish (IMO), there’s been less and less creative design and more and more “let’s add something to the game that causes more subs”.

For an example, check this post:
At the introduction of ‘Fozzie Sov’, it declares in no uncertain terms that the new Sov mechanics would lead to the ‘death and stagnation of Null’. The post didn’t predict everything correctly that would result, because Null blocs adapted, CCP tweaked some things, and of course CCP buffed the Rorqual so much that everyone was motivated to lock their NullSov in that much faster so they could farm the hell out of Nullspace and build mass fleets of Nulltitans and eventually, sit on their giant piles of Nullwealth and do Nullthing.

That process kept a fair number of subs rolling for the years 2015-2018, but we can see that the actual long-term effect was a steep decline in players (currently hidden by introducing Alphas and F2P).


Look if you say so.

Ive never seen a good reason, and CCP havent provided one either, and most new players I meet seem to want to live in HS.

Sorry, but I just dont see the carrot.

Sure, it’s perfectly valid to say “I don’t care about what null has to offer me”. Heck, I know people and even some entire groups who say “I don’t care about money or success”. It’s fine to say “that particular carrot doesn’t appeal to me”.

Saying “I don’t see the carrot”, however, smacks of “Yeah, that mountain in front of me? I don’t feel like climbing it, so I’ll just pretend it’s not there”. Not only is it by far the most productive region, it’s also the one where you can farm in the most relative safety. That’s the carrot.

Like I say, I dont see where CCP is pushing this agenda.

Pretty sure that we agree, Im just not making myself particularly clear.

No worries. I’ll try to be more clear myself then. Offering a carrot isn’t the same as “pushing an agenda” nor “forcing people to play in a certain way” nor “pressuring me to take a certain action”.

The bundle of carrots is this: Massive Wealth, Massive Productivity, the Most OP Ships, Being the Most Powerful Group, Having the Most Toys, Being Practically Invulnerable to Defeat.

The ‘herding’ (or pressure, if you will), comes from the fact that all those things are maximally available in Null, and the mechanics of actually getting Null to produce them. The most OP ships take a lot of resources and ISK to build. That requires space that can farm massively productively. Massively productive farming requires Null SOV, which requires more ships and more people, which requires bigger and more powerful corps/alliances. Maximal farming requires relative safety, which requires bigger and better protected blue donuts. Fozzie Sov ensures that the ‘conquering territory’ part takes large groups with good organization, so again you need more ships, more pilots, more wealth.

All that process fuels subs and Plex sales while people are ‘climbing the mountain’. The problem with it is, once you are on top of the mountain, there’s nowhere else for you to go. You have your territory, you have your massive production, you have huge piles of the most OP ships in the game… and very little reason to do anything with them except continue to protect your mountain and farm the hell out of it. Which leads to stagnation and boredom.

At any rate, hope that makes my view of the process more clear. It’s cool if not everyone gets it or agrees. The data makes it quite obvious what the results are.

1 Like

Ah yeah we are talking about two different things. Sorry.

personally i think they should just add new regions to the game which are only intiially accessible via wormholes, once people get setup, if within lightyear range they could link ansiblex jump gates etc. maybe they could trial it with the jove region.

this would make logistics imperative and eviction a true threat.

It’d be cool to see drifters and/or trigs start attacking ansiblex or even standard jump gates though.

personally i think it’s a byproduct of game designers who had vision being demoralised so badly they left CCP and CCP hired replacements with hidden agendas.

they also seem to be complacent and selling out to pearl abyss was their way of basically shouting ‘■■■■ the player base, we got a bank roll now’

Some of the things you complain about are valid - blue donuts, etc. But where you point the finger of blame is invalid - big ships. One has nothing to do with the other. Big ships don’t cause any of the problems you are complaining about.

Oh c’mon, you seriously don’t expect everyone to call you on this?

1 Like

No, there are too many regions already.

Nah space is definitely not empty enough. Space should feel like space, not the park on a nice day.

before citadels, eve systems felt empty, and places to dock on the overview were precious.

starbases hung around moons, visible on dscan, and maybe if you go to the moons. but it happened in the background.

space felt more empty

You can have blue donuts with nothing but small ships in the game. You can have blue donuts with nothing but big ships in the game. You can have them with nothing but medium ships in the game. Has nothing to do with ship size. It has everything to do with other mechanics and incentives.

The concept of escalation and proliferation just have no meaning here, apparently.

No wonder we are repeating history every day.

Explain. I don’t know what you mean about escalation. But as far as ‘capship proliferation,’ can’t you have ‘subcap proliferation’ too? In fact, even more so?

Oh yea, what exactly has CCP done to get players involved in this “Bigger is Better” vision? Your making a common fallacy, your confusing the results with intended actions. Or in other words, I would say your confusing cause and effect. It is not CCP that thinks Bigger is Better, it’s players that do. Many people use Facebook because it’s the most popular. Facebook didn’t make people use it. It didn’t have a “vision” of being the most popular. It simply happened as the result of people making their own choices. Blaming CCP for big fleets, orcas, supers and etc is like blaming McDonalds for fat people. At the end of the day, people go to McDonalds, because that’s what they actually want. It may surprise you, but the reason why people go for big fleets and etc is because that’s what they actually want. Never make the assumption that people are collectively acting in a way that will benefit the collective or the long-term future.

Now, you may say, CCP should design it so it doesn’t happen. Do you also think McDonalds should design hamburgers that don’t make people fat? Your essentially asking that CCP redo their game because you don’t like the choices that people that have freely made. The great thing about EvE is that you actually can play in small fleets and etc. It is far more flexible and free than you make it appear.

1 Like

The answer to this occurs farther in the thread.

No, I’ve been asking CCP to redo their game design for over a decade because the current design leads to stalemate, boredom, and a steady loss of players and subs. The way Null Sov, farming and cap ships work together to create this stalemate is mostly irrelevant to me, because that’s not where I play. That doesn’t mean I can’t be aware of how the current game design affects the top end of the game and the consequences that has on the player base.

Yes, EVE has small action. It is also poorly designed. You can tell by just how little of it actually occurs. The MER’s show you month after month that three times as much gets produced as destroyed - for years. If that doesn’t clue you in that the balance is off, then nothing will.

That is true. Normally I wouldn’t reply to you because you don’t actually seem interested in discussion. This point is valid however.

Blue donut is one issue. You can and would have it with any size ships in Null.
Null Sov Mechanics is another issue.
Giant Mega-blocs / alliances is another issue.
Null Farming is another issue.
Capital proliferation and their unbalancing effect on overall combat is another issue.

These are all issues of “Bigger is worse for EVE”. These are all separate issues that feed into each other. Mega-alliances feeds into Null Sov which feeds into Blue Donut which feeds into Null Farming which feeds into Capital Proliferation which feeds back into giant mega-blocs, too big to fight, which sit around and do nothing.

All of these things occur because there is no system of counter-balance to “Bigger is better”. All of these things lead to forces which are too large to attack, too well supplied to defeat, too rich to need anybody else’s territory so they just sit and farm endlessly to build up even larger forces which are too big to attack yet too expensive to risk in a throwaway adventure.

1 Like