Take your pick, while not ALL are space theme games there are plenty of games out there, standing on dogma doesn’t make it fact.
A game that rivals EvE … name one.
Then you’re an extremely rare exception to the rule, probably because someone confused you with another player in a similar ship. Suicide ganks against unprofitable targets are rare, and you’re almost certainly going to make more than the 2 billion ISK for a replacement ship before you encounter another one.
And EVE has rivals.
It really doesn’t. And that’s the problem with your ideas, you want to take away one of the major things that makes EVE unique in favor of trying to repeat the same failed business strategy that game after game has attempted.
1 Like
Why? The majority of the isk is in the hull?
It wasn’t a survey. It was data from ccp’s server.
Have you got anything other than anecdotal evidence to suggest ganking hurts retention?
You think eve has rivals because you fundamentally misunderstand what eve is. It’s a persistent pvp sandbox with a real working market.
If you play eve’s ‘rivals’ instead of eve, both games would be better off.
Just as a small reminder, this is how this “conversation” started, you hypocrite:
That was your first sentence in your first reply to me in this thread. Before that, here I had neither talked to you nor talked about me. So if you want this thread to not be about me, just stop you making it about me, you hypocrite.
I’ve only talked about what I do with my stuff here in reply to your crap about what I do with my stuff. You cannot talk about that and then pretend I shouldn’t reply because it isn’t relevant, you hypocrite.
Again, where have I made this about me here other than in reply to you talking about me?
What a shitposter you are… Who has said anything about me flying a Loki here other than you right now? You are the one making this thread about me…
You don’t understand a thing. What I’m against is crappy changes, and specially changes that are bad for the game, not change in general. That clueless players like you are unable to tell the difference and don’t understand why the changes you propose are crap is your problem, not mine.
I would have nothing against the changes made to the war mechanics, for example, which was no small thing and impacted the gameplay of many players, if it wasn’t because it made impractical for small corps to have a handful of focussed wars. If they fixed that, I would be perfectly fine with those changes in general and with corps without structures being able to opt out of wars, in particular.
Nor did I have anything against changing neutral remote assistance flagging from suspect to criminal, again no small change. I think that mechanic has some notable deficiencies, but have nothing against the changes they made there.
And so on with so many things. You’re just unable to imagine that could be the case because making wrong assumptions about everything and everyone is the only thing you’re capable of…
ROFL. Just because you’re unable to understand why some of the things you say are crap and that makes you have to invent some ridiculous “explanation” for me being against that, it doesn’t mean your “explanation” has a leg to stand upon…
I read that, and there is one thing there that seems fine, namely giving some incentive to hunt criminals. Everything else is you not understanding the very things you’re proposing, nor how it all works, nor what the effects of those changes would be. I’d be surprised if anyone that knows anything about the game gave a rat’s ass what you proposed there, it did not even seem coherent to me…
1 Like
When i click on links to reddit and have a browse, i often see badly thought out ideas and comments like total hi-sec safety, eve isn’t a pvp game, pets, null is the centre of the universe, hi-sec is for noobs only etc etc, i could go on.
And that’s where ccp devs seem to spend most of their time. So it explains where they got the impression that null sec is where the game is and that hi-sec being safer is better for new bros.
Thanks for the invite.
Why go to Reddit when you can see the same things here! 
Making New Eden spin off with EVE Ships and stuff?
Imagine there is a game like kingdom heart and one of its gummy ships named Rifter or Retribution?
A game like Fallout Shelter but with SoE stations?
Turn based/real time strategy with eve drones and fighter?
Simcity games on a planet that using PI product name and Epithals?
…and in its end game, the players are directed to EVE Online.
Its like The Witcher and Gwent.
Spam easy to make games, from various genre to eventually funnel them to EVE Online.
Because all the cool bros hang out there of course. 
Because the devs actually post there much more often than here. 
Dayem. That’s a sad reason.
Agreed sad because true.
We need an Eve Online film the trailers and Scope videos are awesome, that would be an instant hit imo.
2 Likes
Eve suffers from a terrible UI. Unfortunately, it’s the same broken UI that was here 5 years ago when I left. It’s user unfriendly and still buggy as hell after all these years.
2 Likes
ISK EVE GUIDE, very old and outdated one. But every time I see it in my archive, I want to come back and start EVE again, even from the beggining. Although it is a product prepared voluntarily and distributed free of charge, the pictures, narration and numerical statistics used are very attractive. Makes you feel how deep, free and unique the game is. Such initiatives should be supported.
IMO the game needs a matchmaking PvE/PvP type system. Make it a simulation or whatever if you need to justify players from opposite ends of the universe appearing next to each other. Anything to take away the pain of manually finding groups and jumping 20+ jumps on the chance of a fight. The game population and mechanics don’t encourage people to engage with eachother currently beyond huge blobs.
Print an ad and pin it to the corkboard in the office.
“eve online corporation looking for an accountant/ senior trading manager, experience minimum 2 years, enter recruitment channel … to begin psychological and counter-intelligence screening”
Wormholes, take a duct tape ship, on top of being more engageable, if it blows up it’s not a big loss and you save time going back home :]
Guess what happens when matchmaking exists? The world becomes even more empty for those outside matchmaking.
People interested in matchmade PVP fights have countless alternative games to play where finding a fight and traversing the world is not part of the gameplay experience. Eve is a living universe. Making it a dead universe won’t attract more people to EVE.
Matchmaking is a possibility but not that great of a one. If you check the forums on games literally built on and around PvP matchmaking you will see that even in those games, the matchmaker is generally considered to suck.
It would be better to concentrate some PvP opportunities in certain areas, and then find some way to create a certain amount of bracketing in the PvP encounters offered in that area. (So that newbies aren’t fighting veterans and T1 ships aren’t fighting T2s and T3s)
That way people who wanted that sort of activity would concentrate in that area and it would allow grouping, chat, corp forming, and other PvP and trade opportunities outside of the staged encounters.
Faction Warfare had a chance of being like this, as did Resource Wars, and potentially even a modified Triglavian encounter could do it. But of course, CCP never managed to get any of those to work properly for PvP.
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.