Hilmar want to remove or correct NPC station and Assest Safety in Eve!

About 1:35:00 into the stream. Hilmar states that anything that can not be destroyed or removed in Eve needs to be correct.

What the HECK is wrong with him!?

So CCP want to remove NPC stations and remove asset safety because they can be destroyed.

Let CCP/Hilmar do that and see how few players will continue playing because everything they work/fought to get can just be taken from them. This guys is out of his F**KING MIND!

7 Likes

I foresaw this response in a dream I had in another thread.

Cant say I disagree with it sounding bad.

Though I confess I had wondered what a game with no permanence would be like.

But then I played Conan Exiles and realised that its a great novelty, but a terrible idea in practise.

12 Likes

First off, you have not accurately relayed what Hilmar said.

[edit] yes he does go on to talk about permanence in general. But that doesn’t change my main point below. Hilmar has had these views since EVE was created.

At that timeslot he is specifically talking about manufacturing. And he is talking about manufacturing being done in complete safety inside an NPC station.

Second, where have you been? Hilmar has wanted EVE to be as dangerous as possible since oh, about 2003.

6 Likes

Eh, Hilmar needs to be in EVE, then.

He’s not a game designer and his record as corporate leader is sparse. Let’s see… EVE was started and designed by other people, and from the time he’s been CEO essentially every other project CCP has undertaken has failed or gone by the wayside. “Failure should have consequences”, indeed!

CCP/Hilmar has this deluded focus that destruction, consequences and risk of loss are the core drivers of EVE. While they are certainly elements of the attraction of EVE to some portions of the player base, they aren’t the core or even essential driver of EVE.

Those are all side-effects of the actual driver, which is “players engaging against other players in ways that interest, challenge and reward them”. Destruction for the sake of destruction is a fools game that will only lead to even less player interest in EVE than is already the case.

Now if CCP focused on making players engaging with other players more interesting and more engaging and more accessible, they’d be on to something. As it is, they’re just pulling a poorly-conceived notion from almost 20 years ago out of their butts and trying to revive a tired game with a design focus that was outmoded a decade ago.

13 Likes

I am ok with that but in context where he talk about about manufacturing should not be allowed in npc station. You sound like a news site. Take out specific items without context.

Don’t be an idiot.

Also…

Eve had a lot of destruction in the past. Then it became safer and eve starter to stagnate and now they are going back to destruction.

4 Likes

And why not? Ppl who build in a safe place allready pays the price, no rig bonus, expensive taxes and so on. they become less competitive, that’s a good price for safety allready

5 Likes

Yet another kick in the carebears’ balls.
:smiley:

2 Likes

Oh look selective quoting by the OP to ferment outrage and further an agenda.

It’s the return of the four horsemen of the apocalypse; fear, ignorance, bollocks and shouting.

4 Likes

CCP Burger needs to learn how to â– â– â– â– â– â– â–  talk!

Errrm … Errrm … Errm … WOAH :angry:

If you don’t know what you’re saying before you’re saying it …
… then you’re doing it ■■■■■■■ wrong!

:angry:

1 Like

It’s obvious that Iceland is full of griefers. That’s why no one wants to live there and their population is so small, just like why no one wants to play grief-fest EVE and why its population is so small!

3 Likes

Actually the Icelandic folk are quite polite and cool headed as a general rule of thumb. It’s more like the South Park episode where Denmark took on trolling, because they’re a bland, polite, mostly orderly people, they’re perfect for telling loud trolls to shush, but why do that when you can make money off of them? Hence, Iceland’s plan, get every addict level troll on the planet hooked on eve.

They’re technologically advanced nordic rednecks; they have a phone app to make sure their new partner isn’t their cousin.

1 Like

If any of you would have watched more then a minute or two. Hilmar says that stations need to be corrected because it is wrong to have anything in game that players can not destroy. He also says the same about asset safety. Yes I am paraphrasing and not quoting him.

I am not fearmongering but giving everyone a heads up. I know plenty of players that read the forum but don’t watch any videos / streams for the game.

1 Like

You kinda are a little. If you are expecting people aren’t watching the video and only going on what you wrote, you misrepresented the thing in its context.

He also said its complicated. There is a reason they put in NPC stations even if they didn’t like them in a pure sense. There is a reason they put in asset safety, even if to them it isn’t the perfect solution.

All of that talk was Hilmar waxing poetic on what he’d want in the perfect scenario, knowing full well nobody can achieve perfection.

5 Likes

Sure, it’s an aberration that there’s no opportunity to attack industry in npc stations, and that you can amass huge piles of crap in those stations that is (largely) safe. (Triglavian invasions excepted).

Games where stuff gets built up and destroyed, tend to be much less involved than EVE though. Like, having all your stuff go poof because you didn’t log in that day, is no big deal in most of those kinds of games, because you can easily rebuild in an hour or two of play. This isn’t the case in EVE.

T1 manufacturing should still be allowed in NPC stations imo. If anything needs to be restricted, then T2 and capital ship components would be enough, I think. Those can be shifted out to citadels and engineering complexes. But keep T1 subcapital manufacturing in NPC stations, so people can at least do a little bit of manufacturing, so they can see if it’s something they want to get into or not.

But that’s just my opinion. lol.

3 Likes

I don’t believe it’s an aberration to not be able to attack industry in NPC stations, any more that it’s an aberration that I can’t attack and destroy someone’s trades posted on the market, or someone’s PI setup.

Having everything at risk of destruction all the time is just something Hilmar pulls out of the air (to phrase it politely) to justify some dumb change they’re planning, or maybe just because it makes him feel like one of the “HTFU” crew to say things like that.

If you want destruction and loss, then you design your game to encourage destruction and loss and allow for continued participation despite this. EVE is not at all structured that way. CCP has made it so assets take significant investments of time and strategy in the game, and then wants to also make it so those assets can be lost at the drop of a hat with no rational method of defending them 24/7.

It’s poor game design, and it’s stupid. It’s commitment to a concept phrase without delving into what it actually would turn the game into. CCP needs to learn to think about consequences themselves, rather than prattle about how great they are for the game.

11 Likes

But… gankbabies will get more pew pew, that’s the goal with 100% of dev changes, it’s the victim’s fault for having assets sitting with reckless abandon in an NPC structure, everyone knows that.

Where’s my orbital bombardment skill?

2 Likes

With the rest of DUST.

In the bin on orders if Hill who must be obeyed.

I mean if there was any indication of a man whose decisions are wiggidy wack, the deployment and death of DUST is a ready example of a brilliant idea squandered ruthlessly.

5 Likes

Yes of course. Well played :slight_smile:

2 Likes