… you’ll give me your stuff?
One cannot fail to be heard if the audience is deaf.
Why? A vote every year is good community content. Makes people feel like they accomplished something, that they belong. Even when they don’t.
I don’t think the CSM or CCP is able to prevent players from leaving. That’s a personal decision, usually not up for debate, especially during rage-quit 
I think CCP needs a research division. Or workshop. To figure out why some games become popular and why some dont. And if CCP can learn anything?
Seeing what we’ve all seen for more than a decade, the ammo would be back after a while. And the larger the company they become the faster it would be - internal communication is never perfect, and final decision making is rarely done by a single person for every possible action. But that does not even mean that the golden ammo offer would not be pulled back again, if it did hurt the active players count (income from subs). It would only mean the effect would be more damaging without a functioning CSM (and I think CCP knows this).
Here’s the thing with voting: as a voter you have to believe that the people you vote for will honor their word - in this case their campaign promises. If they do not keep up their promises you only have one recourse: not vote for those clowns again, but support different candidates who at least have the benefit of the doubt.
A CSM that would actually be behind golden ammo is so far fetched that your remark is about a very hypothetical situation. In that case there would indeed be no use for a CSM, except by CCP as - indeed - a marketing gimmick and a codpiece. It would not help them in the least, btw, not in a game where losses are real.
And wth am I defending the CSM ?! Because it would probably not be accepted from a CSM member, and the goo would be dripping off the screen again. That’s why (note to self, lol)
Wasn’t CCP Ghost? Brought in to sort that and the psychology side out?
I remember seeing presentations from him about player retention etc.
I can confirm that myself and other stupid rich players that ive met have spent anywhere from 2b to 65b in cosmetics just for a single toon. Most have no reason to fly a ship but when I do… its got a pimp skin on it. The NE store doesn’t offer anything near what it should outside of ship skins. I think more time should be spent creating a cosmetic market that is not flooded with so much trash that it all becomes indistinct. Lots of the items get traded back and forth also like currency because liquid isk is pretty stupid to hold. Some of the times I have been an FC, its not an option to not have a nice skin so I fully support cosmetics.
See this post:
About half of the negative reviews (and a portion of positive ones) are complaints that the game costs money. People want to have the game entirely for free. This is a consistent sentiment for many games, and not just EVE. In part this is justified with “things are too expensive these days, so at least games should be entirely free,” and in part “if I can just go and download torrents of my favorite games, why should I have to pay anything here?”
If you cut away the price complainers from the data set (since it appears to be a “gamer constant” of sorts), you’re left with about 80% of negative reviews for EVE that specifically mention PvP (a.k.a. “griefing”) as the specific cause of dissatisfaction. Contemporary gamers aren’t generally interested in competitive/heads-up gameplay. Some are, which is why various FPS and fighting games still exist, but the proportion of supporters for such genres is a much lower percentage of the whole compared to, say, 20 years ago. Most gamers today just want to accumulate in solitude.
Do I feel that EVE should be changed? Absolutely not. I’m just trying to make an objective observation. If CCP wants to grow EVE, they need to immediately add a PvP toggle/flag, in all areas of space, and conduct a concerted marketing push to let the world know that they did it.
It isn’t so much an aversion to pvp or competition, lots of games are very competitive and many of them have a lot of players. The issue is loss on death where “progress is interrupted” if you lose, this is what most can’t be bothered with and there is only a tiny sub set of people who are ok with a challenge like that. And that’s ok.
Not including lancers because that’s trash mechanics and gimmicky bulshit. I wouldn’t mind losing a ship to Snuffed in Tama because risk is expected and welcome. Now if I lose a freighter, while already limited to minimal value in the cargo (which makes hauling fkn horrible and time consuming in smaller loads, while simply leaving or entering jita to a multiboxer anytime they feel like pressing the fkn button… yeah thats ■■■■■■■■ tbh. Theres nothing you can do and yeah the loses are insane compared to the risk they take doing it. Aisha, I agree.
You can have a guy with max Obe skills, faction bulkheads and a high grade clone carrying 2b lose his ■■■■ to 25 mulitiboxed bombers controlled by one person. IS that really a proper risk/reward balance?
I’m glad you pointed that out.
Good post, btw.
That would indeed immediately push up the numbers of the type of players not usually retained in EvE Online. But what would it mean to the game in mid- to long-term ?
But I’m sure you know all this.
I’d have to say yes.
Is the choice to use a 10-12B hull to transport 2B a balanced choice ? Nope.
10-12b hull? Its just a t1 freighter. Id still say that a guy mulitiboxing free accounts shouldnt be in the position to take down a guy with a 12b hull at anytime he feels like it either.
Nobody is doing that…
lol thats because im not gonna warp my Ark past your fleet. If i did, you would take it down as you please. But they are killing anyone at anytime they like who does fly past. Ganking is fine… just saying its not exactly balanced or even a thing that can be combated in a fair way.
How is it not balanced?
It’s basically impossible to get ganked.
If you think it’s so easy, why don’t you do it?
yeah, it would be hard for you to gank my Arks because i have backup cynos and dual webbs on 3 scouts. But lets say its a T1 freighter from a normal guy. Is that a fair engagement? How come? and what choices do they have?
How is it not fair?
Once again, if you think it’s easy to gank a freighter, why don’t you?
I find the game play boring. No offense. Yes i think its easy. Its very easy to skill up the gank toons and deal with sec losses and also to afford the gank ships. Its not fair because the multibox ganker is doing very little and investing nothing but a little isk and time. You just sit, scan, wait. POP. The guy flying the freighter had to spend time training far beyond any of your gank toons. He prob pays for his accounts and you dont. You just sell back the Injectors and its free. The dude prob has at least 2b on the line in his cargo and a hull worth 3.5b last one i saw lost. Ive never lost one but I did offer 10 to 20 courier contracts a day. Thats how I get my information. My items are on collateral so it doesnt matter to me either. It matters a lot to the nub who invested all his time and money into a bad line of work.
However, you haven’t ganked any freighters?
So, you have no experience.
Thats like saying… yeah but you dont have a PHD so convo is over. Cmon. you can do better.
Whenever one suspects something is overpowered, the correct thing to do is take advantage and benefit. Indeed, if ganking freighters is easy, it must be a great way to get rich quick. However, the fact that you are unable to do it, suggests it’s not so easy.
Incorrect, I stated that I think its boring, no offense. I have more accounts than you and would rather not play eve than do something that is boring. Its fully within my ability to gank your entire fleet until the end of time. I choose not to.