Hello new people to the forum, including the Sisi warriors (pronounced: „sissy warriors“) who tried to escape the core gameplay loop of Eve Online:
If you can’t handle Step 4 on TQ in the real game, then Eve is not for you. The rest of us learn how to experiment in ways that are safer or lower cost or more time efficient on the real server. It’s a skill.
Gain the skill, or whine on the forums. See which is more productive.
Well I’ve watched game-breaking bugs discovered on Singularity and mass-reported go completely ignored and make it swiftly onto Tranquility as if they had no idea so I don’t really care and it wouldn’t matter anyway.
You’re not going to read what I’m talking about and there are words for “practice it on TQ” already. Go back to read if you didn’t see it.
Why “risk averse” is a bad thing? Everyone should be reckless like you to learn? Then the problem should be you having the worst measure to learn, and despise everyone who have an low risk advantage than you just because you choose to trap yourself there. You better move out your cells to see outsides.
You should be shame for asking other be shame for not being reckless.
So what? Assets damage have to treat serious only if human life is involved? All forms of simulations are unnecessary unless they avoid life threat? Or this game and it’s players and all their jobs to simulate actions are meaningless? As it is so suck to label “space pixels” you would better consider not to play this game.
Everyone can just throw “garbage comparison” or “Google it” or bad languages to solve every problem in this world.
Your claim of “because loss matters and if you want to learn you have to risk some assets” is ridiculous nonsense and replied previously.
I’m a WoW player and I cannot see how it is related to WoW, since they never design any game ending penalty to your loss, other than ranking loss in ranking PVP games loss.
You would better have a look of who is the contributor of the thing you found in “first search result” on EVE Uni. Just click page history there, it won’t harm you.
Your repeating action do not make false to a fact. These words are intended given to the other person, but you consider to make yourself hit on it. Then you too.
From your behaviors I only see your will to ask everyone accept your opinionated selfish thoughts.
Guys stop with this nonsens… Sisi was never good for new players… cant test stuff you don’t have SP for anyway… so it was gatekeeping new players since forever, quit your bitchin for new players, just admit it, you are angry cause now you have to risk stuff to get new knowledge as it was supposed to be. they patched your cheat, move on!
I read it, you’re upset you can’t test something without putting in work or risking something, if you’re trying to make a point then make it, because it literally only sounds like you’re upset they took away the ability to test something without losing anything
Its not per-se, but there is risk averse by playing it safe on TQ and there is risk averse in that you only do anything remotely dangerous on a server where loss means absolutely nothing and everything is free
Thats how it works yes, you learn by doing, so do it
See not sure what this has to do with anything, i learned by losing ships, much like most players did back when i started, that is how EVE works
If you can’t understand this then there isn’t much more i can do to help you sadly, safety testing for cars is to prevent serious injury, what part of you is sustaining injury that means you need a test server to practice on instead of being a man and risking your stuff on TQ to learn?
I don’t think you understand what EVE is then
Why would i care who the contributor is? you asked if google could answer the question, and yes it can
Thats because what i’m saying isn’t false, welcome to EVE 
No, but i do expect them to understand what sort of game they signed up for lol
Totally LAME! I use the test server for getting screenshots for my posters. Now being forced to buy all the ships + weapon fittings just for a fancy screen shot is going to suck donkey balls 
Can you not just use the preview window for that? you can simulate pretty much any ship in space with it…
Yep. Is it something bad to say? Or you are going to connect it with labels?
You talking them easily largely just these are not your works or risks.
Again. Is it something bad to say? I don’t see doing that is bad.
That’s not how it works. Reckless is reckless, and your reckless do not make it become a good thing.
Players will learn when they losing ship, but they are not have to learn only by that. Learn is not restricted to only measure and you must have a serious misunderstanding about “lose ship makes you learn”. It means you will learn when it happens, but not you only learn from that, not you are going to actively seeking it and not avoiding it and ask everyone accept “only learn from that”.
I don’t think you can define what EVE is.
And then, the serious one.
Every person who contributions informations, knowledge, answers should have “who the contributor is” cares. Everyone in every community should be remembered for their job of being forerunner, guide, discoverer and content creator. Because that is why there are people to create these things for others.
By your statements you just treat anyone who made “Google it” possible like dust. Your words are just disrespect, irreverence to and insulting everyone who made your “Google it” result you are reading, and everyone who made Google.
That explains all your crazy selfish words such as “necessary risk” because you don’t value anyone that isn’t you, you don’t value anything that isn’t yours.
Lastly I am the contributor of the Vorton Projector behavior under System Effects on EVE Uni. Your first Google search result will be not exist if there wasn’t me gathering data to answer it. I can tell you I get that answer isn’t by fly EDENCOM ships to wormhole in TQ, but did it outside TQ instead. You never realize your “Google it” result for these gameplay issues will ceased to exist if there are no jobs done outside TQ.
You would better learn how to respect people. This time both TQ and “Google it” won’t help. Go do your “necessary risk” for that attempts.
Unfortunately the preview window doesn’t show fitting weapons and nor can you adjust the camera for specific angles.
Yep. Goes against the whole point of the sandbox.
Calling it „ridiculous nonsense“ is saying „I don’t understand the game“. Either play live or go play another game.
technically thats what thunderdome was for
I’d like to take back my “Like” on your proposal, because I actually have subscribed 3 Omega accounts this year because of conclusive tests I did on Singularity. And to be consistent, I don’t want this tool and opportunity to experiment removed from newer Alpha players, who can reach similar conclusions than mine, and go forward with a (or multi) subscription.
Again, like I said in a different post, we were getting 2 million SP on Sisi when participating in Mass Tests, and CCP was applying those SP after each subsequent mirrors, for up to 6 Mass test contributions. I had alts with 8-12 million extra SP on Singularity, where I could chose to experiment different ships and with existing content I could not test on TQ because of low skills and Alpha limitation. Now, because of these tests, earlier this year I have commited 3 new Omega accounts with 2 years subscription.
What are you talking about? Who you are reference to “Goes against the whole point of the sandbox”? Isn’t that is you?
Your claim of “because loss matters and if you want to learn you have to risk some assets” is ridiculous nonsense and replied previously.
I’m a WoW player and I cannot see how it is related to WoW, since they never design any game ending penalty to your loss, other than ranking loss in ranking PVP games loss.
Your attempts of cutting my words do not makes your argument is correct. Already “replied previously”. That words better apply to yourself.
„Replying previously“ does not make what I said any less true. Play or go away to another game.
They need to allow at least 1 time a month for testing by players, closing it completely is a bad thing. It will stifle growth. And new metas. I understand it cost Money, to keep it up and running. , limit it to like 1 week a month… People who do abyssal can’t test fits, in game,
we scream because we had the ability to test mechanics we can’t try in live server or can’t do with huge wallet impact.
I have a list of subjects to try waiting Sisi to come back online
If I can’t test on Sisi I’ll put the list on the top of the pile ‘maybe’
result is 95% sure : I’ll never do most of them , putting a limit to my knowledge
If CCP takes this path I can predict a decrease of game testers
because players don’t care a server they can use 1% of time
The result will be in contradiction with the stated goal
If you statements is just “accept me or leave the game” then you are the one should “go away to another game”. You’re not here to talk, you’re here to vent your condescending attitude. Repeating them do not changes this.
The difference between people like you and others is that the later ones don’t disrespect who try on TQ (in fact they are great works we value), don’t ask other to accept must use SISI to practice and simulate, and don’t “accept or leave the game”. If one don’t like SISI, just don’t go there, then we all fine. Forcing all players accept that “usage of SISI is a shame” and that “usage of SISI is against the game definition” and “you don’t know what is EVE Online but we do” is the sources of problems of all talks here.
it looks the way it’s taking. Without this possibility what will be players’s reaction ?
take less risks, do not change usual gameplays
Playing on Sisi is not playing Eve, it is learning
Is it a good idea to limit learning ?
How many new carriers pilots do you expect a year after this change of Sisi usage ?
Personnaly I’ll remove from my skill queue all about maraurers
I mean you’re allowed to be upset, but that won’t change the facts
I mean it literally goes against the spirit of the game, if you want to practice something then you need to risk something, why should you get all of the reward with none of the risk?
Agree to disagree, i mean, humans literally learn by doing, or do you think babies are born knowing everything? the game works the same, you don’t start knowing everything and you learn by experience
Sure, they can learn not to explode, but they do have to put something on the line and not expect to be able to lose 50 ships for free to learn something lol
Yes they will, but they have to actually risk a ship in order to learn, not sure why you think this is in some way wrong, risk vs reward doesn’t work when you get all of the reward with none of the risk
Pretty sure its well defined at this point 
Sure, but that doesn’t mean i’m going to look at the changelog to try and pin down exactly who wrote something, not all of us seek recognition for providing information to the community, i actively run a tool people use, but i don’t need them to know who i am nor do i care if they don’t
So you think its disrespectful to tell people to look for answers to their questions?
Let that sink in for a minute, you think its disrespectful to people to suggest they use their own brains to look for an answer instead of just spoonfeeding them the answer?
You really don’t know EVE do you
Correct to a certain extent, EVE is survival of the fittest, always has been, always will be, the strong thrive the weak die off, this is the nature of the universe
Congrats? nothing was stopping you from doing it on TQ though, other than your seemingly crippling allergy to losing a ship, i don’t bother playing on SISI to see if i’ll lose something, i use trial and error and basic game knowledge to understand how to approach new problems, the same things lots of people do
Are you under the impression that if you didn’t do it nobody else would have done it if they wanted to know the answer? because i hate to break it to you, but someone else would have done it if they had cared enough
Respect is earned and being unwilling to risk anything in order to learn doesn’t earn any, why don’t you think on that
Because it does, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to work that much out for yoursel… oh right thats the issue
I think it’s a shame. SISI was a useful training tool even if that wasn’t its intended purpose. Also having a sandbox to try out crazy fits or new game systems was invaluable. I can understand why this was done but I’m still a bit sad at the decision.