well, because as i mentioned alot, i like eve
also, which multiplayer game offers this?
i ve seen a few, but they completly lack every other aspect eve has to offer.
overall my ideas are just to increase possible interactions, because there is a lack off those when you are not in a big corp.
your problem is that you cant see further ⌠your not improving anything by changing the whole game at its basics ! youre just destroy the game and i assume that almost everyone will quit the game because of your changes !
and what happens if everyone quits a game ? â server closed !
1 Like
as mentioned before, EVE is already on a path to dying out. currently EVE consists of mostly veterans, which means if you keep the current system as is, its just gonna be a slow death. might be years, but it is inevitable without changes. Obviously people that 100% agree and like the system right now, will most likely not be on board with drastic changes, but you could also view them as new challenges (new content which is fun) instead of a threat. they could lead to more new players joining and also staying, therefore refreshing the overall âageâ of players.
tldr; more attention given to content in space and improved systems around travel on top of rewarding active gameplay will solve a lot of the issues expressed in this thread.
The way EVE does sp is in itâs DNA, you wont be changing that.
That said, you do raise some legitimate concerns about pvp availability. I think the only way youâll get what youâre looking for though, is in an arena environment. I know thereâs been some call to bring back proving grounds, but that doesnât really solve the issues of the sp gap.
Another potential option, would be to expand the ship simulation, not just for testing fits against dummies or npc controlled simulated ships, but also to do a simulated fight with another person, and be able to do it under a max skills setting so the playing field is leveled.
That of course comes with itâs own issues, such as lowering the amount of people in the open world, but there are a lot of people who like competitive play more than open world pvp. So itâs possible a feature like that might draw in people to the eve universe who would be mostly interested in the simulator, but then also show interest in the rest at a later date.
That mostly comes down to execution on how well itâs received after itâs introduced.
As to the lore, local is handled by the gate network, itâs why youâre not automatically updated in wormholes, since there arenât any gates.
As otherâs have said, youâre not going to be getting rid of local without first giving null blocks a real intel tool that functions in a similar way. Blackout already proved just turning local off will not work.
Also⌠youâre not going to get more kills by making it easier to hunt, all youâll do is make it undesirable for those who live in the area. So what youâre really looking for, is to make the prey complacent, because they feel safe.
Besides, these types of players arenât the type youâre interested in fighting anyway, based on your earlier remarks in your post. I suggest trolling around in fw space. Youâll find a lot more solo and small group content. The seasoned players are very good at it though, so youâll die a lot learning.
Yes, youâre not alone in noticing the issues with the warping mechanic. In most other games, you have to actually travel places, but in EVE itâs kind of like youâre fast traveling everywhere. undock, warp, do content, warp, content, dock, undock, warp, ect.
There are a couple solutions to this, but the first deals with what you said about adding content to the systems. I have a fairly sizeable thread that spoke about redoing the mission system to incorporate procedural generation. But thatâs not jsut limited to mission agents, all dungeon sites (anomalies, signatures, DED statics, ect.) can make use of the concept.
Whatâs more, in the thread, I mention the concept of making planets and moons a central part of this plan. Points of interest on and near the celestials for content, and the mass shadow of the celestial itself to keep people from warping away would create large grids people have to fly and navigate through to do content.
Other types of similar content could be created in space, such as making actual asteroid belts:
image sourced from the same mission thread
Imagine having to actually fly around in a belt to search for objects and have that belt be endless in every direction. Maybe interesting tidbids would show up when scanning signatures, or would be created through the mission generator, which would then populate in the belt. But youâd still have to use some sort of mechanic (preferably something more visceral than what we currently have) to scan the various points of interest within the belt - then when youâre close enough, it would either show up on the overview, or on a scanning module fit to the ship.
Finally, instead of changing current mechanics related to warp in a major way, I propose adding a hyperspace option that requires fuel to engage. This would allow travel between the stars without the gate network, but it would not be instantaneous and if you get close enough to another player (say 1-100 au - dependent on signature radius and scan resolution), youâll both be knocked out of hyperspace - with no concord protection.
This could function not only as a travel mechanic between stars, but also a way for ccp to create more content locations without creating any more static solar systems. Large objects in space, like a Jovian station might create a 100 au bubble that kicks people out of hyperspace when they get near it. Or there could be derelicts or large battlefields out there in the deep black.
On top of this, allowing this alternative method of travel also gives CCP the ability to allow sov holding alliances to turn off gates without destroying counter play options.
Obviously the suggestion also means weâll be able to warp in any direction without the need for a destination (since without it, youâd be immediately knocked out of hyperspace when you tried to engage it.) To balance this with the current destination warp⌠I suggest the current method will eat less capacitor, and require a module or rig slot for the new version of warp.
If players also get the tools to see other players while in hyperspace and warp, it will open up the gameplay to so much more than just being reserved to gate camping.
I agree with you that multiboxing is bad for the game, but itâs not something CCP is going to police. It would be too difficult to enforce, and they make money allowing it, so the incentive structure isnât there for CCP to want to get rid of it.
The best weâll get, is content that requires enough attention that it would make multiboxing not workable. For example: a hacking mechanic with a continuous attention requirement, like tetris.
Iâm not saying EVE should use a ui like that, itâs just an example of something simple that could be done that requires the playerâs attention. CCP would probably want to still keep the current hacking gameâs theme, with itâs circuit board style and monochrome graphics.
You should fly more frigates.
EVE is kind of in a weird place, that the hardest things to fly well, are also the most accessible.
I do agree with you that thereâs a large part of the pvp game that is rock paper scissors, but to be blunt, that sort of thing exists in every competitive game that has large amounts of choice. League of Legends and Dota are famous for having their meta champion rotations.
The issue here isnât that EVE has a rock paper scissors balance, itâs more that it factors so heavily in determining the outcome of a fight.
What if you could hack another playerâs ship to affect it in various ways, turning off modules (would require turning them on again not to eat your capacitor,) doing extra damage to overheated modules, lowering resists, lowering hp by %, scrambling ui elements such as the overview or dscan for a limited amount of time, ect.
And to make this more fair, the person being hacked could defend using a similar ui. This mechanic would require an actual person to be present in a ship, rather than rewarding multiboxing. It of course wouldnât do anything against blobbing, unless you just only allowed one hacking attempt per ship, but then youâre back to not really punishing multiboxers other than just increasing the amount of things a player needs to pay attention to.
Those are coming. Weâre not sure how it will be implemented, but fw mechanics are coming to null. ESS probably wont change (unless theyâre going to work that into the corruption mechanic for null) and I donât really think they need to (other than bringing them to empire as well.)
CCP just needs to reward active play more. They should still keep the current mechanics, but if you have the ability to actively control some element of your ship, you should be rewarded for it. (ie: passive mining vs active mining.)
In a game like EVE, that would probably come by way of a series of minigames. You could ignore the minigames, and let the characterâs skills do everything for you or active play and not get the benefit of the characterâs skills, but if youâre good at the minigames, you could out perform a player with max skills.
Null, at least in the case of sov null, is a strategic territory control game. Obviously it allows for other gameplay modes, but itâs primarily a much larger game.
Npc null and lowsec is more inline with what youâre talking about. fw mechanics coming to null will do some to mitigate some of your concerns, but thereâs still quite a bit else that could be done to make the situation better (some of which I mentioned earlier in this post.)
To be fair, youâve not earned it, until itâs safe in a station.
But to your point, this is also another place where CCP could reward active gameplay. Instead of making it a timer, make players hack the bank repeatedly. Let us use those mercenary items we have to give us the illusion of sending people in to extract resources (which also gives us a good tie in to vanguard if CCP is brave enough to do it.)
Regardless of how itâs implemented, using some sort of hacking mechanic (whether itâs themed for data hacking, or combatants clearing out a structure, or w/e) instead of a timer will allow a player to decide for themselves how long they wish to invest for their reward.
Ultimately though, EVE is an open world game, so youâre going to have to deal with blobbing. The best the developers can do, is create mechanics that reward spreading out.
I could probably say more about this, but I think Iâve written enough of a novel.
and every game is dying at some point ! eve is dying since 2003 and still alive so âŚ
based on what evidence ?
show us the sources where you can prove eve will die !
and didnt we get changes on a regular period of time ? oO so everything you said is " eve will survive " because we get our changes ( not like you wish but your wish would real kill the game ) and this means the game survives 
nobody said they like eve to 100% xD everyone has something they would change ⌠i would also like to change the local but i know that this never going to work without a very big loss of players ! and a loss players results in less income for CCP ! if CCp get less income then they need to fire some of their employees and this will result in less updates, less hotfixes, less bugfixes ! if the game get less updates, less hotfixes, less bugfixes then more player will leave the game because of less new content and your in a loop hole down ⌠only because you changes one little thing like the local chat !
if yur going to more drastic changes like your idea of warping and system sizes then we would lose some ships we had lern to love like inderdictors ⌠they are useless without warping ! we would lose all tackle modules because they are useless without warping !
and the bigger part of this change is, that you will change the base of this game ! you change the immersion ! you change the idea ! and if this happen it will also result in a massive player loss for CCP !
so ⌠as i said you dont think far enough ! how could you ? your char exist since november 23 ⌠you are never be able to know all consequenzes of your ideas !
yes its another kind of challenge but its also another kind of game you like to create ! and we all like eve and youre creating a new ⌠dont know ⌠elite dangerous ? oO
no they would not lead to more new players or refreshing the older ones ⌠because older ones are gone and the new ones couldnt come because CCP needs to close their doors of all their lost players !
EVE has been dying since 2004. Itâs been said so many times, itâs a meme all its own.
Except your ideas wonât increase player interaction.
EVE is what it is. Itâs not all those other games. Itâs a niche game, sure.
Youâre trying to apply the lessons from other games to EVE. They wonât work, not if you want to maintain the playerbase.
Enjoy it for what it is, your chances of changing it in the manner you propose, while non-zero, is on the order of 1/googolplex. Your best chance to get these changes would be to buy CCP from Pearl Abyss.
Iâll also point out that youâve come storming in here, insulting all and sundry and claiming some prophet like saviour status. Youâve put more than a few noses out of joint. Possibly part of the reason no-one takes you seriously.
The rest of the reason is that your ideas, by and large, are pretty bad.
Some important truth, mixed in with creating greed to always keep in mind when suggesting changes to the balance, in a very well already balanced game.
Iâm not sure about the mini-games, they could get out of hand easily. For reducing multiboxing/botting, not sure if the boat has not already sailed on that, seeing the raise of AI. Itâs only a matter of (short) time until AIs will be able to play EvE the same or better than a human player.
1 Like
Ah, the mysterious âtheyâ that anyone can just conjure up and invent some story for with zero evidence that anyone ever experienced this series of calamities in rapid succession.
1 Like
Yesterday we had a newbie in german help chat, who experienced this, and after we explained how it works and how to avoid, etc. they were happy to learn and continue. 
1 Like
@Destiny_Corrupted I have read your posts over the years and generally agreed with them but you post in this thread, I just canât. You clearly have become one the bitterest of the bitter vets.
I would rather EvE stay the way it is now and eventually die while still being EvE than to instead live on by trying to appeal to the current generation of gamers and becoming something completely different.
3 Likes
Your âlogicâ is some of the silliest I have ever seen. The only person advocating for your âshrink the systemsâ change is you. Everyone else thinks itâs a silly idea. Nobody else has ever proposed it in the entire history of Eve. Youâve received countless reasons why it is a silly ideaâŚyet still you rattle on with it under some delusion that it will âsave the gameâ. The only thing the game needs saving from is the profusion of silly, game wrecking, âsolutionsâ to non-existent problems.
It simply never seems to occur to you that people call it a dumb idea because it is a dumb idea. In fact it is so dumb that I did begin to wonder whether April 1st hadnât arrived early.
I always love it when people who never created and launched a successful product are coming to people who did launch, maintain and made profits out of a successful product for many years, telling them what they do wrong and how they should throw away all their obviously inferior concepts and just listen to all his new, fancy and totally superior ideas.
It reminds me of the situation of a man without a watch asking a man with a watch what time it is, and after receiving the answer that it is 12âclock yelling at him âTHAT CANâT BE!â.
Itâs hilarios, almost comedy.
3 Likes
Iâm going to speculate here on how New Edenâs galaxy is built, from observation and some experimenting at the occasion of bugs present during the triglavian invasion.
It seems to me that every solar system of the map (and that goes for w-space as well) is a set of coordinates, with a reference table (i.e. gates and wh connections) establishing the existing - read âpossible or allowedâ - connections (which are essentially just solar system âboxâ transfer points). Itâs likely that a limited âboxâ is defined for each solar system, to hold the celestials and the occasional things like anoms, sigs, dead space, etc, much in the same way as a 3-D grid is defined around structures and ships currently.
In other words, the New Eden galactical map is not a continuum, it is not ârealâ in the sense of âevery possible direction, every combination of xyz (or ĎĎθ) coordinates is presentâ, once outside of the box that represents a solar system.
That box can be stretched - just as it is experienced with grid elongations due to structures currently (e.g. structures 10k away from a gate will generate a much larger grid, and of course the old gridfu approach)
It was also experienced (if you were quick, lol) when back in 2019 or 2020 some triglav minor conduits spawned at ridiculous distances on a particular day, sometimes at places that appeared to be halfway to another solar system if you did the math. Those âbuggyâ conduits were still defined in the proper solar system box where they were supposed to be - the box had stretched. But you can never travel outside that box (I tried it, at a certain point you donât âmoveâ anymore, you never reach that other solar systemâs box, you remain on the box of your point of origin and are never transferred and defined e.g. in Local). The outside is not defined, there is no âtransfer point from one solar system box to anotherâ (unless itâs a pre-defined one). It simply does not exist in that virtual world.
But most of us who start traveling right after downtime already have experienced that calculating the defined boxes (of which there are under 10k probably), or making them active, is time consuming, making us wait at gates until the server is ready. Imagine what happens when 30k players start making brand new boxes and grids throughout the day, on the fly.
That is a computing and memory resource limitation, probably because you canât have 30k (or more) people making calls to the server to recalculate or create entire grids and (inter)system boxes all the time. I think itâs meant to conserve resources, and allow us to be on a single shard as well - but Iâm no IT guy, so I could be wrong.
So any changes concerning intersystem travel (as opposed to intrasystem travel) would likely necessitate a total rebuild of the concept of the virtual galaxy and with far larger computing capacity.
But I do like your concept of the huge asteroid ring shaped belt. That would be neat.
Itâs not particularly mysterious when I define the concept as Iâm referring to it. Realistically speaking a lot of people quit the game right after the first calamity. Itâs not like the premise is entirely unreasonable either. I got podded at Jita in those specific circumstances with this character one day and smartbombed at a gate on an alt last night. These are things that happen. They can happen to me, you, a new player, or a veteran. They are, however, much more likely to happen to new players.
True, this could be a major limiting factor with creating ânew not solar systemsâ in the deep dark in between the solar systems that already exist. The easy way to deal with that initially, if the hyper space mechanic were introduced, is if you drop out of hyperspace not near a solar system, youâd get dropped into a zarzahk type environment that would dot you out until you die (which is an environment that could be handled client side since youâd pretty much just be waiting to die.) Itâs not the ideal solution, but itâs a workable one until a more lasting solution could be made for creating content in those locations.
As for dealing with the edge of the solar systems that are currently in game. Just do the same thing. When you get too far away from the sun, your ship would start taking dot until you turned around or transitioned to hyperspace.
Hyperspace itself, in terms of game mechanics, would just be a large system youâd transition in and out of, hidden by the gate transition effect that already exists in the game. While in hyperspace youâd be in constant motion and be burning fuel.
I mean, weâre already doing that. The only real difference, in terms how the game handles things, is there would be one more physical system (hyperspace.) I do agree though that creating more system space on the fly out in the deep dark might be too much for the current code / server base.
Yeah, anything to make the simulation more immersive. My thoughts on that are heavily influenced by elite dangerous and star citizen.
Where is your actual evidence for that rather than something youâve just assumed that a mythical âtheyâ do ?
So much of the arguing here depends on that mythical âtheyâ to support some argument. And yet time and again the real evidence does not support these âtheyâ arguments.
For example Iâve often seen it claimed that ganking is a huge cause of noobs leaving. âTheyââŚa bunch of people never specifically quoted or named, leave because âtheyâ got gankedâŚand âtheyâ think it is a big problem. WellâŚsorry but CCPs own data shows that the actual number of noobs ganked is tinyâŚ1% or so. This is actual data, as opposed to lots of opinionated âtheyâ narrativesâŚ
1 Like
I also like the concept of âdropping out of warp/hyperspace unexpectedlyâ and ending up in a new environment with content. But only if that content is player made and detectable / manageable. On the other hand⌠stop bubbles in midspace, with player made âcontentâ waiting for the unsuspecting pilot, werenât (or arenât ?) exactly popular.
As to the DOT aspect you brought up, getting blown up by npcâs and players is already one thing. Losing ships to DOT, well ask anyone who was caught in Zarzakh, trying to limp to the gate, how that feels 
1 Like
So they left without even getting blown up ? Dang, we must shoot them faster then. Our good intentions and restraints, all for nothing !
/irony
1 Like
I know from other online worlds that the way things work is by way of LOD ( level of detail ), so things further away get displayed in increasingly less detail. This is why there is often a bit of stuttering even on my RTX 3060 when approaching those massive stargates that exist between the empires. As you approach the gate, increasingly more detailed structure has to get called up.
This also means that the sheer scale of a system in which nothing exists between the structures, gates, etc, is largely irrelevant, as for each individual player thereâs no need to call up the entire system in full detail. In fact having items waaay far apart is probably beneficial from a lag point of view.
And, of course, this is also another reason why the âshrinking the systemâ idea is a bad one.
2 Likes