Except it’s not about the structure, it’s about the safe status of the goods inside being changed to no longer safe.
1 Like
Thanks for sharing, RiP
Should have fueled your ■■■■
k thx bye
1 Like
Yes, but asset safety…
anyway, this thing has been talked about for months now clearly should have paid more attention or logged in or well, i dont care anyway; litter should be cleaned up and if your not using it well now someone who is playing can.
CCP does follow its’ own rules, and has for years. The only problem is, people keep confusing long-standing reliable game mechanics (which CCP can and does change at any time), for those ‘rules’.
CCP’s actual rules:
- Our game is awesome, CCP is awesome, and if hundreds of thousands of players disagree and vote with their feet, well, obviously those were bad players.
- CCP makes no mistakes and admits no responsibility for anything, Game problems are caused by bad faith players, exploiters, RMTers and bots. If we get flat-out caught red handed doing something wrong, we’ll either have the fiction department write us up a melodramatic apology, deflect it with another issue, or what the heck, just ignore that we got caught. After all, players are stupid and forget quickly.
- It is better and cheaper to invent cheap tricks to milk the herds of sheeple who play the game than it is to work on designing and programming a better game. After all, good employees cost money, and they keep leaving our company when they find out the corporate culture here amounts to “Agree with Hilmar”.
- There’s nothing more important for a player to do than to keep constant watch on, and adapt to, any ridiculous requirement CCP off-handedly throws in the game. Players’ real lives don’t matter, they’re just loot pinatas after all. Logging in or staying logged out, either one is consent to be bilked.
- There’s no such thing as commitment to the player base, or to the things CCP has promised previously. The important commitments are this quarters stats, our pay-checks, and staying in line with the corporate groupthink so you’re not in the next round of layoffs.
- When you can’t think of anything else to do, screw a bunch of players over. It makes news, and news brings in more sheeple!
I stopped committing to CCP when it became clear that EVE was just a cash cow to be milked to fund every hairbrained, half-a55ed effort they felt like trying.
2 Likes
If CCP removed NPC stations it would make owning assets a liability in themselves, and therefore most assets would need to be converted to go into the magic PLEX vault.
So many sociopaths on here that take great delight in the suffering of others
1 Like
How long until CCP lets people raid your PLEX vault?
Yes, I love to watch other people suffer. So what?
Are you racist towards sociopaths?
1 Like
Sociopaths are not a race.
Just sayin’
2 Likes
Welcome to EVE Online, where the entire life’s work of your gaming career can be wiped out by one random A-hole. Pretty amazing marketing material huh? It really draws the new players in!
This is doubly stupid when you consider CCP’s year long push to reduce the wealth glut in the game. All of these assets were essentially sidelined and out of the economy. Now we have this massive instant injection of trillions in wealth back into the economy. The stupidity and sociopathy of CCP never ceases to amaze.
2 Likes
I learned something new today…
1 Like
Apparently you are a bad player if in 8 years you havent learned to read dev blogs and patch notes to be on top of things. Especially if you are interested in economics.
and you couldnt designate someone to keep structure fueled in your absence? Also nice corp if no one of “100 in TS” warned you about it.
I wonder which business school teaches “putting all eggs in one basket”…
and lastly:
HTFU.
2 Likes
So you’re telling me, that I shouldn’t have dumped all my savings into crypto… interesting.
1 Like
nah… thats called gambling.
While saying this is a bit of an oversimplification, Eve is a zero-sum game at its core. That means one player’s loss and suffering is another’s gain and delight.
CCP doesn’t hate the OP. The OP is just collateral damage of a change to the game which CCP thinks is better for everyone. That still sucks for the OP who lost stuff through a combination of bad timing and perhaps questionable choices, but that doesn’t mean CCP shouldn’t have done what they thought best for the game. You have to occasionally sacrifice some of your customers for the good of majority of your other ones.
That’s business. That’s life. While maybe CCP would do a couple things different given the chance to do it again, they probably would make the exact same decision again. The lootapolooza event has been a success, and their bold choices have shaken things up and gain the attention of even the wider gaming press. And the same considerations of effort and trade offs still exist meaning no matter what CCP did, some players were going to be sacrificed for the greater good of the game and the realities of software development.
I would still give odds that there is a reasonable chance the OP will be back this time next year, but if not, that is the cost of making bold changes to a game that needed it. Greatness never comes without sacrifice.
Collateral damage. O7 to the OP and the others lost to make our game better.
3 Likes
The same one that teaches “buy high and sell higher”.
3 Likes
Tell me:
who is the game better for now, aside from a select few who looted stations?
how is EVE better for driving away people who were willing to invest time into the game, and for some reason had to pause?
CCP lost sight of the #1 rule of video games, and that’s that they’re not THAT important.
1 Like
Who are they driving away? They are doing something bold and different and people are paying attention. More practically, they created tens of thousands of player-hours of content, and generate plenty of buzz, and did so without the extra development cost some of the demands people are clamoring for here.
And what is the cost? Maybe a few dozen unlucky players who weren’t even the greatest customers as they were unsubscribed? I am not trying to be callous, but the math clearly supports what CCP did in the end. Sacrificing a few for the greater good and taking the easiest development path is a no-brainer. Sure, CCP would prefer to keep everyone, but choices have to be made and they have only limited resources that need to be spent wisely.
I do feel for those that got unlucky, especially those that were forced away from the game by forces beyond their control, but their suffering is for the benefit of the greater good.
3 Likes
How is this benefiting a greater good? Yeah, there was a brief looting event. Now people know not to put up citadels casually - so they solved the problem of citadel spam in highsec, I guess.
They could have just turned off all of asset safety. Or, they could have made it legal to shoot at structures in the abandoned state without Concord intervention - and left asset safety intact. I suspect that, in the absence of nullsec wars to grab headlines, CCP wants to show the total destruction of highsec and get headlines that way.
Know what? Have EVE your way. And no, you can’t have my stuff.
So who are they driving away? Me, even though I lost nothing in the Fortress update.
Because I have friends who had life issues going on and haven’t been on in months. CCP is apparently OK with them taking heavy losses, because EVE is apparently that important.
Except it isn’t. And I’m not going to invest time in a game that thinks it is. And no, you can’t have my stuff.