Maybe I am naive, but I have still have faith in CCP.
2 Likes
If you feel that way, why are you even here 
, your version of the world is depressing as â â â â
Hello.
As I checked two days ago on EVE Help channel, there are only two ways to report botting:
by choosing Report Bot entry in Character Information Window, and
by submitting support ticket.
While the first method is straightforward when itâs possible to check someoneâs character info, it doesnât apply well on market activities. The second method I prefer to use only if necessary, so probably I wonât use it at all.
My suggestion is to add one more option on right click button when selecting an order to report such order, even donât knowing who stands behind it. Then itâs up to your AI to compare it with your botting patterns and to decide should you have a look on it or not and, and if so, implementing the rules.
That would be how I can help. And yes, botting bothers me.
Have a nice day, MdS
2 Likes
It really does suck that this is going to hit folks like you, yeah. People like you are doing this the right way, playing the game the way CCP seems to want Alphas to play it. My advice to you right now is: donât give up on that. No, you wonât be able to do the L4s in the bling Rattlesnake when the March release hits, but try to get there before it does. Give it a try. Maybe itâll be something youâll want to get Omega for.
Yeah, the slog to get back there, to make enough ISK in a month in HS to afford to snowball your way along and keep paying for Omega by playing the game⌠it wonât be easy. But before you write it off⌠see how it goes.
And consider dipping a toe into lowsec or null with less expensive things, things you can afford to lose⌠a lot. Because there is stuff to do out there that you wonât want to risk the shiny toys forâespecially at firstâbut it can be a lot of fun.
Then youâve done the most important thing you can do in EVE, havenât you?
As for time commitments in null⌠theyâre not as much as you think. Even during wartime. Or try out wormholes. A group of friends can make all the difference in this game.
4 Likes
Thatâs basically what I am doing right now as I watch this thread, blitzing L4s until I get there. I hate feeling like I am on a time limit though. I am still holding out hope that this foolish decision will be reversed, or they find another way to achieve the same thing.
1 Like
i have a few alphas that can accept the epic arc for gallente . will they still be allowed to do that as the storyline agents are level 4 i think?
I have an Omega account so it doesnât affect me. Iâll pay my 15 dollars a month because thatâs just easier for me, rather than having to grind out plex. I do have a few questions and concerns though, because I care about this game and I want it to succeed. (f*** me right?)
Doesnât this only hurt the people who play at their keyboard? Botters donât care about content. They literally boot up a program and let it run while they go do other things. It doesnât matter that they can only do level 3 mission now. Theyâll make less isk, sure, but they still put no effort into the game and are making isk. Will this somehow narrow the search for botters down? Will detecting botters become easier for CCP becasue of this change? If so, then I can understand the reasoning behind this decision. As of right now all I really see is denying PvE content to those who actually play. Sure, the content is dated and isnât the greatest, but itâs still content.
The Alphas who actively play, who are grinding level 4âs so that they can buy plex to upgrade to omega now have an even harder time trying to do so. Sure they can go to null and rat in a Navy Vexor, but dang⌠that might be more mind numbing than missions imo. I just feel that the botters wont really care and keep on botting while the newbies who we want upgrading to Omega are the ones suffering.
Just my thoughts on things. ÂŻ_(ă)_/ÂŻ
4 Likes
isnât Eve based on the concept of âI wanna make someone elseâs day suckâ?
- so you attract those kinds of players; the kind that âenjoy carebear tearsâ for sure, but it tends to drive out any players that canât/donât wanna âharden the F#ck upââŚ
I think thatâs the problem with Eveâs population numbers. Sandbox is wonderful and theyâve done a great job building a universe. - But they gotta solve the inherent paradox of the basic concept vs growing the player base.
1 Like
Iâm doing the same thingâŚ
but now, they want you to pay for it and actually, I canât blame them.
I used to play Omega as a casual player and went Alpha once I realized I could continue to play casually without cost.
I kind of knew this would happen and was awaiting the news.
great question⌠it would seem logical that they could aid in the L4 mission
A post was removed.
Please do not post links to RMT websites publicly on the forums. If you want to report a website you found that is doing RMT, please fill out a support ticket with that information so that it can be looked into.
Thanks! 
I think EVE is more based on the concept of âthe moments you remember and enjoy most in a game are the ones where you matterâ. Conflict is what drives a good story, and the best way to get solid, organic conflict and a sense of real ownership, of real agency, in a game like this is to let a lot of that conflict be against other playersâŚ
⌠but that canât be the only conflict. Thereâs a cluster of some 40 trillion+ people, the smallest empireâs navy could crush the combined firepower of every capsuleer like squishing a bug⌠and what they do doesnât matter to us? (cuz⌠it doesnât)
Itâs a gigantic black hole in the middle of the game⌠literally⌠where the people who are most engaged and active with the stories that EVE is marketed on⌠mostly just donât even go. And the people who do go there, the majority of EVEâs players⌠donât pay any attention to whatâs actually happening there, either.
The game needs to be more than PvP. It needs to be more than a bizarre hybrid of Starcraft-style base-building and Unreal Tourney.
1 Like
well said !
CCP tried to make competitive game where 100 players will be losers to satisfy 1 winner and at the end of the day everybody have to pay 15 $ monthly subscriptions, great math and excelent idea, can not wait to patent it 
2 Likes
Falcon and Hillmar are first in line against that concept.
Why? Loooong story âŚ
1 Like
One solution would be to let high sec actually mean high security.
Not âarea with a bigger chance to die then traveling alone in 0,0â, as it is now
3 Likes
The widespread belief is that a lot of the BOT problem involves Supercarriers / VNI / Gila ratting in null space yet CCPâs focus here is all about penalising high-sec alpha players with nothing proposed that will affect the bulk of the problem in null space.
Why is there no talk of limiting alpha access to Incursions or Combat Anomalies - are these less affected by BOTS? The former might be as they are group activities and probably require player input to stay alive. If so this suggests an approach for security missions. Surely combat anomalies have much the same problems as security missions so why would they not be restricted too? or is it just easier to restrict security missions?
There was no mention of any problem with L4 security missions in the last security update but now they are targeted by CCP for no obvious reason. If they are a real problem, perhaps we could make it harder for them to be carried out reliably by an alpha bot eg make them less predictable or limit the ships and weapons that alpha accounts can use to run them eg no Battleships or battleship weapons, no heavy drones (VNI), no mixed faction ships (Gila). Battlecruisers can run L4 but they are slower and the tanks might be marginal perhaps requiring active player involvement to stay alive. Sounds a lot like the original alpha setup to me. Perhaps we could introduce âmission policeâ who would randomly drop into missions and issue a challenge that would require player input with destruction ensuing if no response is received.
Of course one of the problems with this is that it would mean that alphas were not allowed to use skills they had trained, which would make them very unhappy with CCP, whereas banning them from L4s allows CCP to say, you can use all trained skills somewhere just not here. Both routes produce annoyed players or ex-players.
If you limit alphas in high sec as proposed this would reduce demand for alpha injectors hence reducing CCP income from this source. If Alphas were not allowed to run L4 missions they would have less need for rapid training except perhaps for incursions - until they too become restricted. At the moment an Alpha can easily train to a point where you can run L4 missions within the 5m skill point cap. Perhaps that should not be possible without the need to use injectors to get there.
If you want to encourage alphas to put money into the game perhaps you slow down their training even further or cap free skill points at a lower level, making alphas more dependent on daily alpha skill injectors that can only be bought via CCP for real money or introduce an alpha subscription at a lower price than Omega that then restores Alpha abilities to more like the current setup.
At the moment CCPâs proposed actions seem punitive towards a subset of players while not targeting the bulk of the problem. If we understand more clearly what you are trying to achieve we may be able to offer more helpful suggestions.
This change will stop me playing Eve - I had a subscription for many years and went through the great alliance wars and I do not want to go back to them. I will not play enough to justify a full subscription and what is left to Alphas will not be of interest to me.
1 Like
I like whatâs going on itâs pretty nice
Why not just cap the number of L4 missions alphas can run per day? That keeps them from effectively farming them endlessly while not adding anymore restrictions to them.
1 Like
That wonât defeat bots since they can run as many alpha accounts a day as they please.