But you see thats all the screaming happening. New players this, new players that lol.
1 Like
I see some screaming, but not a lot. More people would be screaming if it was a majority.
2 Likes
Its obvious CCP wants more of our money. GREED
I mean, they are a for-profit business, literally every company exists to make money and they will always want more of your money, what are you expecting lol
What CCP Said:
“We are Trying to Implement better Processes”.
What I am many others Hear:
“We are taking away you ability to find out how the game works”
Been playing on and off for over a decade and the ability to get onto SiSi to find out “Undocumented Features” that were not deemed important enough to put in the details of an item or skill has been invaluable. True learning thorough testing needs piece and quiet, not something that is available on TQ.
I agree that the role of a “Test Server” in Code Development is not how the community uses SiSi. But unintended uses are not bad, they are just different. CCP is able to achieve both objectives, the current player utilisation as well as “Focused Testing” they have just chosen not to do that.
As for the new “Testing Focus”, meh! As a protest vote, I will save all my questions that do not exist in forums or Videos for when the server is Open, then test them and only them being carful to provide Zero (0) feedback on the “Focused Testing” that created the situation. When you take something away that has been the foundation of the game for over a decade, people are going to push back, regardless of it being better for the game or not!
As for this being better for the game, you are having a laugh. People that do not understand things, will not use that thing, generally. Whereas if I think this new cool thing that I Trained and Testing with in SiSi may give me an edge, I am likely to head out for some PvP, which is the point of the sandbox, isn’t it?
2 Likes
well none of this is true…
you have to drop an upwell to be able to declare or recieve a mutual dec on SiSI…seems that hold true on TQ.
you also can not smartbomb an upwell…well you can, but it doenst take damage and no concord.
another mechanic test…as suspected you can not have a mutual wardec with one group to simply rep them cause they are at war with another different one…we did this one to on SiSi to prove the mechanic to someone.
just a few examples of testing out actual mechanics…that cant be done anymore
1 Like
Might i consider a hearing test then, because they didn’t take that away, unless they have now banned you from TQ aswell
Seems like a petty move to close the test server that was open for players for so many years under the false pretext of “testing on work-in-progress features”. I mean why can’t you do both? How letting players access the test server will impede your testing? It make no sense!
I just found out about this, since I don’t usually go on the test server. I wanted to try a build I wasn’t sure about, so I tried to log on. When the connection was refused, naturally I looked it up and came across this.
Yes, it kinda sucks. The new player argument is absolute garbage. Mirrors didn’t happen frequently enough for it to affect new players. Losing the ability to play with high-value builds in safety really blows, though. There are a significant number of players that can’t afford to buy the expensive stuff, nor do they want to operate in Low or Null Sec on TQ.
That being said, I can see where the developers are coming from. They want to use the server for actual testing, rather than it being just a playground for players who don’t want all the hassle of TQ. I have mixed feelings about it, but I am in the camp where I would want to keep letting players do what they do on the test server.
I think you guys need to reverse this policy. Singularity always has been a public test server, and should remain a public test server for a lot of the reasons that people have outlined in this thread. I understand that you like to focus on mass tests and honestly, nothing is really stopping you from doing that like you’ve done for decades, a few I’ve even been a part of.
In my use case, I’ve a vet whos returning to EVE and there are A LOT of changes since I was full time. A lot of the mechanics have changed, a lot of new things added and quite frankly, the documentation isn’t always up to scratch on how that stuff works. We can’t always rely on EVE university, nor should we, to get an understanding for new things to the game. Yes, the typical crowd will cry that you should be doing that on TQ in the sandbox, but I specifically want to test how these actual things work in a controlled test environment changing up multiple variables to my actions, fits and so on.
I emplore CCP to open Singularity back up to general availability public testing with haste and I ask that the incoming CSM members pressure CCP to do the same.
SISI has always been a public test server for hunting for bugs and for testing upcoming releases, its goal was never to serve as a risk free sandbox for people to minmax content on, and the bug testing portion will remain during specific mass tests
aka risk free minmaxing, not the intended use case for SISI, do it on TQ like everyone else
1 Like
Look, I think you’ve made your point here in reply to everyone’s threads. How about you give a rest instead of having to reply to literally everyone’s comments. We get it, you want it for a very specific use case. Other’s don’t, accept that and move on.
Instead of spinning my words by trying to say I want a “risk free sandbox” and that I want to conduct “risk free minmaxing”, I don’t. I also don’t need SiSi for that when there are perfectly good out-of-game tools for precisely that.
I don’t just want to test upcoming features, I want to test a whole bunch of stuff that came in over the last few years. Some of the things I had gripes with have been fixed, but there are others from well over a decade ago that annoy me to no end. The whole point of a test server is to test. Test repeatedly, test under various scenarios and to change certain parameters of that test. Its literally access to free QA for CCP. I could understand if CCP doesn’t want the daily support headache of SiSi and that’s completely understandable and acceptable. What I don’t understand is your relentless assinine responses to literally everyone in this thread with the assumption that we wish for a risk free sandbox, we don’t. Move on.
1 Like
I mean, its CCP that want it for a specific use case, a use case thats in line with how the game is designed, maybe you should accept that and move on
I don’t need to spin your words, you literally said you wanted to use it for risk free learning, not sure how you think thats me twisting your words
So buy it on TQ and test it, like the majority of people do, risk vs reward, the reward in this case being knowledge, the risk being you having to actually learn from experience
Right, but people aren’t using it for QA, they are using it to mess around with expensive ships and to test fits out rather than actually doing proper testing and looking for bugs, so CCP isn’t really getting any free QA with it how it was being used, now they actually will
Because it is, you yourself said you wanted to use it to learn whats changed over the years, you can do that on TQ just fine, so if it being risk free isn’t the reason why you don’t want to do it on TQ what is? saying you want a “controlled” environment" is just asking for it to be without the risk of someone interfering
Do you have an actual reason that doesn’t boil down to wanting to test things without risk or for free?
1 Like
It’s not that we are on the side of CCP, we just know that CCP will likely not reverse their decision and the players need to adapt to that reality. Part of that adaptation is acceptance that Sisi will not be publicly available.
2 Likes
This will reduce content. People will not be attempting far out plans and strategies in TQ as EVE content risk/reward is far to unbalanced. People will not attempt to peruse very costly and risky ventures with no way of knowing if it is even possible to succeed in the first place. SISI training isn’t about absolute safety it’s about not loosing 10 billion isk in the first ten seconds of a new strategy because of a stupid mistake over looked.
1 Like
A lot of things in life have an area to practice in relative safety to learn and understand how things work.
- You never buy a car without taking it for a test drive first, or even learn to drive on the road first, you start in a safe place that is as risk free as possible.
- A sports team has a practice field, they do not just go right into a league match with never practicing.
- Military have training grounds to practice and hone their skills.
Singularity was that practice field for Eve online.
I could understand it being unavailable so you can test specific things at times, but I feel it should still have periods where players can use it to publicly test and learn about things.
3 Likes
All these examples exist on the same reality as everyone else though. Some random person could still appear and mess with you.
In EVE, TQ this is done by finding a quiet system, or in case of a test drive, having a friend lend you their ship.
Will you lend me your Super so I can try it out? It’s very nice of you, thanks!
2 Likes
With enough trust, safety measures, or collateral, yes. You seriously don’t think car dealers would let you test drive a Lambo without guarantees that you won’t just drive away with it.
New mass test made me really miss public SiSi access. After using /booststandings I confirmed that the UniWiki is missing 9 working COSMOS agents including 1 that I have not seen referenced on any other guide, wiki, or site,
1 Like