# I regret to inform that we still don't die enough **URL:** \ **Category:** General Discussion\ **Tags:** pvp\ **Created:** [November 15, 2021, 4:34pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/i-regret-to-inform-that-we-still-dont-die-enough/336984 "2021-11-15T16:34:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 46
**Author:** ![Gerard\_Amatin](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/gerard_amatin/32/481361_2.png) [@Gerard\_Amatin](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Gerard_Amatin)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2021, 5:22pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/i-regret-to-inform-that-we-still-dont-die-enough/336984/923 "2021-12-15T17:22:44Z")
> [@Kezrai\_Charzai](#): > > The earlier statistics posted on PvP participation, for instance, referred to **Logins** and not players _or_ characters. Every PvP event generates at minimum 2 “logins involved in PvP” and on average more than 2. So if 13.8% of _logins_ are engaging in PvP, then much less than 1 in 7 logins is actively seeking PvP. What is a ‘login’? Players is defined, characters is pretty clear too. But what is the definition of ‘login’ used in that number? ---
**Author:** ![Aisha\_Katalen](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/aisha_katalen/32/387724_2.png) [@Aisha\_Katalen](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Aisha_Katalen)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2021, 5:34pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/i-regret-to-inform-that-we-still-dont-die-enough/336984/924 "2021-12-15T17:34:40Z")
A few days ago the rant was about how pcu is down even with the rewards, so someone had to explain that account logins purely for the daily rewards don’t affect pcu. So now “login” is also a metric that can be used to spread illogical nonsense that suits one’s narrative. ---
**Author:** ![Wes\_Wyhunnan](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/wes_wyhunnan/32/409400_2.png) [@Wes\_Wyhunnan](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Wes_Wyhunnan)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2021, 5:35pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/i-regret-to-inform-that-we-still-dont-die-enough/336984/925 "2021-12-15T17:35:46Z")
> [@Kezrai\_Charzai](#): > > Keep in mind the thread isn’t saying PvP doesn’t happen. It isn’t saying PvP should be removed. It’s asking “what can be done to add **more** PvP and destruction?”. Yeah, got it. I’m saying your belief that you would change the game to add some sort of element to encourage small gangs to roam into null is pointless. They already do. All the time. ---
**Author:** ![Kezrai\_Charzai](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/kezrai_charzai/32/394578_2.png) [@Kezrai\_Charzai](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Kezrai_Charzai)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2021, 5:41pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/i-regret-to-inform-that-we-still-dont-die-enough/336984/926 "2021-12-15T17:41:14Z")
> [@Aisha\_Katalen](#): > > A few days ago the rant was about how pcu is down even with the rewards, so someone had to explain that account logins purely for the daily rewards don’t affect pcu. > > So now “login” is also a metric that can be used to spread illogical nonsense that suits one’s narrative. Seems like it must be a tough uphill struggle when you want to twist the facts to support your own narrative. You PvP-rah-rah types certainly seem to put a lot of effort into it. Keep in mind that the numbers quoted are produced by CCP, not me, and come from 2015. When it was mostly paid subscribers, well before Alpha clones, and long before the “constant stream of login incentives” became their go-to for propping up the dismal player counts. But hey, keep on twistin’! There’s a very small crowd of PvPers on the forum who will like anything you post so long as it’s negative BS, and facts be damned. ---
**Author:** ![Etch\_Masuka](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/etch_masuka/32/468743_2.png) [@Etch\_Masuka](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Etch_Masuka)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2021, 6:21pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/i-regret-to-inform-that-we-still-dont-die-enough/336984/927 "2021-12-15T18:21:18Z")
> [@Kezrai\_Charzai](#): > > Keep in mind that the numbers quoted are produced by CCP, not me, and come from 2015. Why are numbers from 6 years ago relevant to eve today? ---
**Author:** ![Gerard\_Amatin](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/gerard_amatin/32/481361_2.png) [@Gerard\_Amatin](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Gerard_Amatin)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2021, 6:33pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/i-regret-to-inform-that-we-still-dont-die-enough/336984/928 "2021-12-15T18:33:17Z")
Again, could you please give the definition of a ‘login’ so that we can continue discussing the value of the numbers you posted? I could do an assumption, but I’d rather hear it from you too, so we both use the same definition. - A ‘ **character** ’ is well defined: anything the character (identified by unique name) does - A ‘ **player** ’ is a combination of all characters belonging to that player. It’s well defined, but hard for CCP to measure as they won’t know for certain which accounts belong to which person. - A ‘ **login** ’ would then be an account, combining all characters on that account? That would be a logical unit CCP could provide numbers on. Is this also what you are talking about when you say they have stats for every ‘login’? > **Or another (wrong) assumption...** > > From the name ‘login’ itself my first assumption was ‘all the actions on one character between logging in and out’, but that would produce nonsense results as a PvP character that logs in, does PvP, then logs out, then logs back in, does no PvP, then logs back out, would add '_50% of logins do PvP’_ to the statistics in that case… so I’m pretty sure CCP did not pick that as their definition of ‘login’. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Kezrai\_Charzai](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/kezrai_charzai/32/394578_2.png) [@Kezrai\_Charzai](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Kezrai_Charzai)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2021, 7:44pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/i-regret-to-inform-that-we-still-dont-die-enough/336984/929 "2021-12-15T19:44:13Z")
> [@Gerard\_Amatin](#): > > From the name ‘login’ itself my first assumption was ‘all the actions on one character between logging in and out’, but that would produce nonsense results as a PvP character that logs in, does PvP, then logs out, then logs back in, does no PvP, then logs back out, would add '_50% of logins do PvP’_ to the statistics in that case… so I’m pretty sure CCP did not pick that as their definition of ‘login’. For better or worse I would assume that is the actual definition of a login, as it’s pretty consistent across gaming measurement discussions. A login is everything a character does between logging in to the game on a character, and logging out of the game on a character. Recall that in those days there was no “logout” option to switch characters on the same account. To switch characters, you had to exit the client and log back in again. I also don’t see why that would produce ‘nonsense’ results, as we are talking about the frequency of PvP here, not the number of characters or players. What you do during a login is a pretty good indicator of how attractive that activity is to you. Conversely to your example, a character who logs in, does PvP, logs out, logs back in again, does another PvP, would count for at least 4 hits on the frequency. The point of statistics is that over hundreds of thousands of events all those border cases wash out and you get a pretty good picture of the overall situation. The following are assumptions, because only CCP can answer your question, not me: A login where a character logged in, checked his trades on the market, adjusted some, completed an industrial job, undocked, mined 1000m3 ore, docked, switched ships, undocked, fought a duel, docked again, would count as 1 Login for _all_ those activities. It isn’t character based or account based or player based, because it counts each individual login separately and ticks off all the activities engaged in during that login. Again, keeping in mind this is back in the day when Alphas didn’t exist and probably 90% or more of all logins were on paid accounts. Thus it may be more accurate to read their statistic as “86.2% of all logins engaged in zero PvP activity”. And again, every person that seeks out PvP causes a minimum of **2** hits on the PvP counter, whereas most activities will cause only a single hit. So depending on whether you are counting “actively engaged in PvP” or “PvP occurrred”, the numbers there will be inflated. ---
**Author:** ![Destiny\_Corrupted](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/destiny_corrupted/32/411527_2.png) [@Destiny\_Corrupted](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Destiny_Corrupted)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2021, 7:46pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/i-regret-to-inform-that-we-still-dont-die-enough/336984/930 "2021-12-15T19:46:15Z")
> [@Etch\_Masuka](#): > > Does the big blue donut have an impact on levels of destruction? I know there have been a few chunks taken out of it but if that number of players are all blue to one another then they wont be engaging each other when they otherwise would have been? > > And if so how does CCP fix that? Because ultimately thats decisions taken by a minority of players who control those blocks. Its not necessarily something that CCP can fix without interfering in the in-game politics. > > Your corp is bigger than mine……….ill form an alliance with this corp…….oh you have an allaince now to……in that case we will form a mega alliance. And so on and so on. Till you have goons against the donut and a massive statelment outside 1DQ that goes on for months. > > CCP/ME/YOU GUYS can come up with as many different ideas about how we can better PVP or destroy stuff. But as long as a handful of players are controlling null blocks, setting who can and cant be attacked, where members can fly, what fleet doctrines are……then nothing much is going to change. At least not for the large amount of players living in null. One simple solution is to tie the null faucets to normalized destruction values per constellation/region. Too little fighting, and space stagnates with less ore, fewer NPCs, fewer anomalies, etc. But if players fight, and sovereignty changes hands, then the winners of those encounters would take (or retain) possession of space that is now refreshed with PvE opportunities. I doubt the null lobby would favor this sort of change, though. The farming must not be interrupted, especially when there are people who literally pay their rent through it. That ISK on places like PA doesn’t just _magically_ appear there. > [@Aaron](#): > > **I’m in no way pushing this idea, but I have been asked for an Idea and here it is:** I had the idea of an Automated tournament system or lobby sort of feature, I could go in and browse what pvp duals pilots have set up, there will be lots of pilots there already waiting for people to join their pvp dual, it could be 1v1 or 2v2 or 3v3 etc, I can set up a 1v1, limit ships to T1 destroyer with T1 fit or limit value, in order for an opponent to join they agree with my terms, or if they set up the game I agree with their terms. There could be a facility to be a spectator and place a wager. > > I’m not saying this is a great Idea, but if I knew there was a lobby with people “waiting to pvp” I’d be persuaded to join a team and have some fun. What do you think? > > I suppose this is a kind of instance gaming, which is different from spontaneous multiplayer gaming. if anything this might get the attention of people who don’t usually pvp, a couple of miners might go for it and set up fights between each other which as a baby step in the right direction. > > I think a gentle approach might be needed here like “it’s there if you want to take part” kind of thing. _Very few_ players would take advantage of this (just like very few take advantage of abyssal arenas today), and they _certainly_ won’t be miners. That’s just wishful thinking. When I infiltrate carebear corps, most of those players won’t even help test a tank, _even if I offer to provide them with a ship to do it with so they don’t risk “accidentally blowing up.”_ The response is like “go n ask a pvper m8 i dun reely wanna fite.” It’s a different breed of gamer. They’re not going to do your arenas, no matter how palatable you try to make them. > [@Xucca](#): > > If we went to the attachment to stuff as an issue, an interesting view could be that Null settling is too cumbersome to risk and therefore, it’s protection is indispensable, leading to no choice but adhere to the donutbrella. > If settling was light packed and sov wasn’t so foundational, the donutbrella would perhaps explode in multiple entities and maybe there would be a reduction of confrontation scale while there could be more conflicts all over the place. > > Destruction is not a consequence of SOV --per se-- or at least the current state of affairs don’t seem to show a need for change. There are less encounters but at larger scale --when they happen–. > In comparison, some years ago, the fights were “more real” as one could see plausible reasons derived from mechanics that encouraged confrontation in the SOV business. Now it’s more programmatic, as SOV became a game in the game, nothing really “serious”. There are many reasons for that which we could discuss for ages but I doubt it’s required changes are on sight of the horizon’s horizon. That’s because in the past, there was a limited number of DED complexes to go around, and groups constantly fought each other for access, or even brought gangs to secure areas temporarily so that they could farm them out. Now that you can upgrade your systems and spawn as many of the things as you want, there’s no longer a need to fight anyone over territory. > [@Xucca](#): > > I think it’s a great idea if it leads to more destruction “real in game destruction” given that experiencing PVP helps to reduce the aversion for PVP. No, it doesn’t. Maybe you’re thinking of building risk tolerance through continuous exposure to risk, but this isn’t the same thing. Many players who experience PvP as targets of other players do not become any less averse to experiencing it further in that same context, or seeking it out on their own as active participants. > [@Aaron](#): > > It could be about “Eve-cred”, if you get called out and refuse what does that say about you? > > Guys, we might have something viable here, if we could write something up professionally and present it to CCP I’m sure they’d have a look. I’m kinda excited lol. > > Shall we put something in the Ideas section of the forum? But you already **can** call someone out? We have a dueling feature in the game, and it even protects participants from external interference. You can even agree to use alts or a neutral third party to scan the ships to ensure participants are abiding by the agreed rules (if any). Your idea is effectively an extension of the abyssal arena feature. I personally don’t care about whether or not it’s in the game as it doesn’t affect me, but I think we’re both well aware that very few players will take advantage of it, and the ones that do are likely to be career PvPers anyway who are seeking fame on some official leader board. > [@Xucca](#): > > Before… I’d like to add: Highsec should never be a --considerable-- source of destruction but one of conflict. What I mean is, yes, there should be destruction but with consequences that somehow percolated to Null. But that’s too much. In a perfect world it shouldn’t, but it **has** to be if the majority of the game’s population lives there, and the majority of the game’s economic activity happens there. > [@Xucca](#): > > Hulls for Piracy… or modules for piracy… like hooks and ropes used to board real vessels… I honestly think that a freighter should not be destructible at all --for this particular scenario–. If anything, a piracy act against a freighter, should be the longest encounter scenario for having intrinsic mechanics piled to it. > Lootable after usage of piracy modules, yes… to certain amount… and vaults… that a pirate must crack to access shiny goodies that can be fool’s gold too! I luv it! Think about how much stuff is destroyed when a freighter explodes, and how much the economy relies on that happening for stability. ---
**Author:** ![Kezrai\_Charzai](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/kezrai_charzai/32/394578_2.png) [@Kezrai\_Charzai](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Kezrai_Charzai)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2021, 7:53pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/i-regret-to-inform-that-we-still-dont-die-enough/336984/931 "2021-12-15T19:53:43Z")
> [@Destiny\_Corrupted](#): > > One simple solution is to tie the null faucets to normalized destruction values per constellation/region. Too little fighting, and space stagnates with less ore, fewer NPCs, fewer anomalies, etc. But if players fight, and sovereignty changes hands, then the winners of those encounters would take (or retain) possession of space that is now refreshed with PvE opportunities. > > I doubt the null lobby would favor this sort of change, though. The farming must not be interrupted, especially when there are people who literally pay their rent through it. That ISK on places like PA doesn’t just _magically_ appear there. This is creative, and is the sort of thing I _think_ they were aiming for with their new ‘dynamic’ systems. You are correct that the null lobbies control too many subs and would not allow this. They would simply tell their constituents to start cancelling subs until CCP “saw the light”. It would also have the problem that many people would think “I’ll just keep farming, it’s someone else’s job to pump up the destruction numbers” and I suspect many would accept a reduced safe payout rather than engage in more destruction. Now a potentially interesting twist on it might be, if the powers that control Sov didn’t do _enough_ fighting and destruction to be considered “policing” an area, that the number and strength of NPCs in the region would keep increasing to the point where pitched battles needed to be fought to bring the area back under control. The destruction resulting from that in turn bringing the “control” level back down to acceptable for the time being. ---
**Author:** ![Kezrai\_Charzai](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/kezrai_charzai/32/394578_2.png) [@Kezrai\_Charzai](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Kezrai_Charzai)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2021, 7:56pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/i-regret-to-inform-that-we-still-dont-die-enough/336984/932 "2021-12-15T19:56:29Z")
> [@Destiny\_Corrupted](#): > > _Very few_ players would take advantage of this (just like very few take advantage of abyssal arenas today), and they _certainly_ won’t be miners. I agree, even though I think the concept is at least worthy of running some numbers and trying to develop it a bit. I also agree that the issue with “gladiator battle” type setups is that unless there is a _need_ to participate in them, or good rewards even for failing, that in general only the people who think they’re going to win will sign up for it. So something like less than 10% (or less than 5% in some cases) participate. ---
**Author:** ![Xucca](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/xucca/32/373499_2.png) [@Xucca](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Xucca)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2021, 8:19pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/i-regret-to-inform-that-we-still-dont-die-enough/336984/933 "2021-12-15T20:19:44Z")
> [@Destiny\_Corrupted](#): > > Think about how much stuff is destroyed when a freighter explodes, and how much the economy relies on that happening for stability. I specified freighters being impervious to piracy, not to ganking. > [@Xucca](#): > > I honestly think that a freighter should not be destructible at all --for this particular scenario–. > [@Xucca](#): > > Lootable after usage of piracy modules, yes… to certain amount Piracy deserves a level of complexity in consonance with EVE Online. Ship destruction should not be the typical end game. I think it’s a great idea. Someone insisted that EVE is too focused in kills. Well, there is a plausible way. I think you’d like it too. ---
**Author:** ![Destiny\_Corrupted](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/destiny_corrupted/32/411527_2.png) [@Destiny\_Corrupted](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Destiny_Corrupted)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2021, 8:24pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/i-regret-to-inform-that-we-still-dont-die-enough/336984/934 "2021-12-15T20:24:41Z")
I don’t have any problems negotiating with someone to either pay a ransom or surrender the freighter for a percentage of its value being given back to them, and have done it many times in the past. Being able to take control of a ship by force would eliminate these relationships entirely, and distill every encounter into a guaranteed total loss for the target. They’d just self-destruct every single time. ---
**Author:** ![Kylanti\_Hendar](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/kylanti_hendar/32/385538_2.png) [@Kylanti\_Hendar](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Kylanti_Hendar)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2021, 8:36pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/i-regret-to-inform-that-we-still-dont-die-enough/336984/935 "2021-12-15T20:36:40Z")
That would be my definition of a login too. But I would argue the numbers are skewed the other way. When I log in to PvP I usually login, PvP roam etc then log out. When I was doing reactions I would log multiple characters in and out, multiple times. So I think you can stop claiming that PvPers are over represented by this. ---
**Author:** ![Gerard\_Amatin](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/gerard_amatin/32/481361_2.png) [@Gerard\_Amatin](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Gerard_Amatin)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2021, 8:52pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/i-regret-to-inform-that-we-still-dont-die-enough/336984/936 "2021-12-15T20:52:44Z")
> [@Kezrai\_Charzai](#): > > For better or worse I would assume that is the actual definition of a login, as it’s pretty consistent across gaming measurement discussions. A login is everything a character does between logging in to the game on a character, and logging out of the game on a character. Recall that in those days there was no “logout” option to switch characters on the same account. To switch characters, you had to exit the client and log back in again. Thanks, that’s a workable definition. It also means that those statistics, using ‘logins’ are worthless for your claim that very few people PvP for the fun of it. > **Quote with claim and numbers** > > > [@Kezrai\_Charzai](#): > > > > Fact. By CCP’s own statistics, less than 15% of logins engage in PvP. (13.8% here) > > > > ![](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/original/4X/8/c/8/8c82d8bbb18d93fad0d7431f48dd004b9d68ec0a.png) > > > > Take 15%. Subtract the gankers, the math for profits, the e-peeners, the grudge matches. > > > > Feel free to give me an estimate of how many players are left engaging in PvP ‘for the fun of it’ in this supposedly PvP-based game. Then make a case for how it’s not a small percentage. > > > > People in general aren’t playing EVE for the PvP fun. They’re playing it for the space economy. And there’s significantly fewer of them doing it every year. For example, I consider myself a PvP player who enjoys doing PvP for fun. I log in at least 10 times _not doing PvP_ for every time I do PvP. My personal login engagement of PVP would thus be less than 10%. While there may be PvP players who do nothing but PvP, I think there is a large group of players who do various things in EVE, PvP _and_ PvE. Each of those players will have a lowering effect on that login number. Your claim was about _people_ enjoying PvP. You used login numbers to build your point on. It’s not hard to see that people are not logins. And it’s also not hard to see that login activity percentages can be vastly lower than what players enjoy doing. While I won’t make a claim about how many people do PvP, your numbers don’t prove anything for your cause. This is what I mean with that you need to _understand_ the numbers you’re using with, if you’re trying to convince people with data. Because your data is irrelevant to your claim. And also 6 years old, but that’s a minor detail. ---
**Author:** ![Kezrai\_Charzai](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/kezrai_charzai/32/394578_2.png) [@Kezrai\_Charzai](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Kezrai_Charzai)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2021, 10:20pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/i-regret-to-inform-that-we-still-dont-die-enough/336984/937 "2021-12-15T22:20:35Z")
Well, thanks for demonstrating once again that there are people who can math, and people who can’t. This is why lotteries make hundreds of billions of dollars all over the world. Because people think one made-up example invalidates literally millions of data points. EVE would have in the neighborhood of 10 _million_ logins per month. The examples of you and the other “reactions” guy are meaningless noise in the background of that. And again, every PvP event gives 2 or more hits on the counter, unlike all the economy ones. You’re a nullblob F1 monkey. You PvP when the blob says to PvP. Because you do that 1 in 10 logins, do you assume that means 10% of players are _also_ nullblob F1 monkeys? The data says what it says. You and the other desperate “must argue against everything” forum PvPers can make up all the counterexamples you like. PvP is and always has been a minority activity in EVE. It’s pretty clear from just how little attention CCP pays to it. I mean FW has been badly broken for over a decade… they don’t care. PvP isn’t where the money comes from. If you’ve got better stats based on millions of logins, feel free to provide them. And for the record, I didn’t make any claims as to how many players PvP or not. Only to say it’s a small percentage. The claim I _made_ was this: > [@Kezrai\_Charzai](#): > > People in general aren’t playing EVE for the PvP fun. They’re playing it for the space economy. And there’s significantly fewer of them doing it every year. And the numbers show that, overwhelmingly, people are logging in to do economy, and a very small amount of PvP. Please try to get what you’re arguing against straight. It makes you look foolish when you can’t even manage something simple like that. ---
**Author:** ![Sgt\_Ocker](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/sgt_ocker/32/270881_2.png) [@Sgt\_Ocker](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Sgt_Ocker)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2021, 11:07pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/i-regret-to-inform-that-we-still-dont-die-enough/336984/938 "2021-12-15T23:07:10Z")
> [@Kezrai\_Charzai](#): > > it would certainly be worth checking the numbers on Proving Grounds and seeing if the support for more is there. Eve doesn’t need MORE instanced PVP, it needs the chance of achieving something from engaging your enemy. As long as we have 30k member alliances that can easily hold up in a relatively small area of space (for a year) and be completely safe, meaningful destruction in Eve will remain a stalemate. CCP aready have the code for what causes stagnency and if they were willing to tip the rocks over and shake things up they could. I just don’t think they are willing to tip those rocks over because those living under them won’t like it. ---
**Author:** ![Sgt\_Ocker](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/sgt_ocker/32/270881_2.png) [@Sgt\_Ocker](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Sgt_Ocker)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2021, 11:08pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/i-regret-to-inform-that-we-still-dont-die-enough/336984/939 "2021-12-15T23:08:59Z")
> [@Duella\_Cre\_Vil](#): > > and they’re holding my tools for me for absolutey no reason XD Fetch me a left handed screw driver… ---
**Author:** ![Duella\_Cre\_Vil](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/duella_cre_vil/32/297348_2.png) [@Duella\_Cre\_Vil](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Duella_Cre_Vil)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2021, 11:23pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/i-regret-to-inform-that-we-still-dont-die-enough/336984/940 "2021-12-15T23:23:32Z")
Im fixinf the smovnotch that ignites the flangelactuator. It’s also potentially explosive so stand back a bit. ---
**Author:** ![Sgt\_Ocker](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/sgt_ocker/32/270881_2.png) [@Sgt\_Ocker](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Sgt_Ocker)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2021, 11:24pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/i-regret-to-inform-that-we-still-dont-die-enough/336984/941 "2021-12-15T23:24:53Z")
> [@Wes\_Wyhunnan](#): > > 5 to 60 ships in our space taking fights And here’s why things need to change. > **[zKillboard.com / Related Kills | HM-XR2 | 2021-12-10 05:00](https://zkillboard.com/related/30004715/202112100500/)** > > A battle took place in HM-XR2 (Delve) involving 57 pilots who lost a total of 885,980,950.66 isk When one group simply wins with N+1 it removes a lot of the drive to engage. Encounters like this is just ganking without consequences. ---
**Author:** ![Gix\_Firebrand](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/gix_firebrand/32/456949_2.png) [@Gix\_Firebrand](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Gix_Firebrand)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2021, 12:43am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/i-regret-to-inform-that-we-still-dont-die-enough/336984/942 "2021-12-16T00:43:06Z")
> [@Kezrai\_Charzai](#): > > People keep seeming to want to jump on the “but PvP already happens and is great!” bandwagon all the time. > > Keep in mind the thread isn’t saying PvP doesn’t happen. It isn’t saying PvP should be removed. It’s asking “what can be done to add **more** PvP and destruction?”. > > All these “yeah me and my bros sure do luvz us some PvP!” memories don’t add anything to the convo. Or, well, some local color, maybe. So what is enough PvP for you? You keep moving the goal posts LOL. > [@Kezrai\_Charzai](#): > > PvPers can cry all day about “carebears who got PvP nerfed” but the simple fact is, the EVE PvP scene is very narrow and niche, focused mostly on a few very limited scenarios, and could do with some expanding. How would you know? You don’t even play bruv. > [@Kezrai\_Charzai](#): > > Seems like it must be a tough uphill struggle when you want to twist the facts to support your own narrative. You PvP-rah-rah types certainly seem to put a lot of effort into it. > > Keep in mind that the numbers quoted are produced by CCP, not me, and come from 2015. When it was mostly paid subscribers, well before Alpha clones, and long before the “constant stream of login incentives” became their go-to for propping up the dismal player counts. > > But hey, keep on twistin’! There’s a very small crowd of PvPers on the forum who will like anything you post so long as it’s negative BS, and facts be damned. So are you for PvP or nah? Cause you can’t have it both ways 😃 I mean you could always start a duel at the sun club. > [@Sgt\_Ocker](#): > > When one group simply wins with N+1 it removes a lot of the drive to engage. > Encounters like this is just ganking without consequences. N+1 has been a reality since one ape slapped another. You wanna win? Find more friends. Its a simple fact of warfare. Anything said otherwise is sophistry. [Previous page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/i-regret-to-inform-that-we-still-dont-die-enough/336984.md?page=45) [Next page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/i-regret-to-inform-that-we-still-dont-die-enough/336984.md?page=47)