How would this add to the economy? My ship that I spent 3 billion ISK for breaks down and becomes unusable? Why would I spend 3 billion on that then? Better bring the prices down by a lot. All ships become disposable after what? A few months or a year? People that have capital ships that have been sitting in a starbase waiting for when they’re needed suddenly won’t be able to fly them when called upon? That would hurt and bankrupt the economy. Suddenly we’re spending billions replacing old ships and millions maintaining used ones. That’s not a boon to the economy. It’s a huge drain on the economy.
I have around 20 ships and a lot of them don’t get used because they’re special purpose ships. I didn’t learn the skills and buy the ships to see them rotting before my eyes.
I’m looking forward to ship hull fires and firefighting BOBs in the Legion expansion. Yeah, there’s no oxygen in space - but I assume it’s something like leaking plasma with some trace oxygenated elements.
Get your chatGPT ass outta here. This basically removes the ability to sell anything other than brand new hulls on the market as well as just makes the game more annoying to play. I don’t see the benefit to anyone here.
The general idea of a “maintenance cost” for “army units” in some way is actually a very good one. Hence it is established in bascially every good strategy game. It prevents older/richer veterans from stockpiling assets to a degree that fighting is basically no longer an option for newer players (or in case of EVE: groups). We would see a lot more political drama, wars, aggression, forming and crumbling of large empires if they couldn’t maintain a basically untouchable cap/supercap-domination over every younger rival.
However, such a system has to be simple, not inconvenient (aka time-consuming) and not unreasonable restrictive. And unfortunately: It should have been in the game from day one. Because right now where everone is simply used to the fact that “storage is free”, nobody would like it if you come around with the idea that suddenly people should pay for their stockpiled assets. Even if it would be clearly better for the game as a whole, individuals still vote with their wallets.
So basically punish the wealthy and successful for being wealthy and successful. The more you have, the more we are going to fine you to keep it “fair” for everyone. There’s a form of government based on that principle. Hmmm, I wonder what it’s called, and why we don’t use it…
How would it be better? Drive down the price of every asset in the game until nothing is worth making anymore? It already costs too much to make ships right now.
This wouldn’t be better for the game. It would only enrage everyone to the point where everyone would be flying disposable ships destroying everything in sight until the new players had no way to skill up to the big ships that used to be worth having.
If you make ships worthless (and this would), High Sec dies right after the giant Catalyst war. If you devalue the cost of big ships by making them rot away after a few months, then no one will make them because no one will buy them at their current price. That is why they would be worthless.
I already explained that. The reason is the same why basically every strategy game there has some penalty for massing up strong stuff. It comes in different ways, being a flat “cost/round” to maintain or a “supply cost” so you need additional support structures (which cost money, energy whatever) to maintain larger armies or even a “weight” for heavy armor pieces so you get a movement/hitchance penalty for wearing lots of the heavies protection measures or weapons.
Even EVE had that at the beginning: Storage Space in POSes was limited. You wanted to stockpile more ships? Need MORE POSES. More fuel. More systems even, because even moons and thus anchoring spaces were limited. Leads to conflict. Prevents overstockpiling to a point that even a successful attack is not having any weakening effect any more. But today? All ships of EVE, all ships ever undocked, hell even ALL SHIPS EVER BUILT in eve could theoretically dock on a single Citadel. At once. Every item ever built, every bit of ore ever mined can be stored on a *single Citadel. No limits. And it even can be teleported away when under threat.
The current devs simply don’t understand that these limitations were good because they were conflict drivers and allowed newcomers to rival and shatter existing empires.
It doesn’t bother me that you don’t understand how all this plays together, you obviously don’t. You only care for your personal gain, keeping your advantage over others.
It’s called Capitalism, where all around the world the rich people are higher taxed than the poor. And it’s pretty successful. Don’t mix things up here, every society and every economy needs transfers from the rich to the poor, else the gap widens so much that at some points the rich got to see the pitchforks. Yes, the strong have to carry the weak. Thats why we have great health insurance in Europe and in the US people lose a lifetimes savings over a cancer diagnosis their insurance company doesn’t want to pay for.. or at least delay payment until you’re probably dead.
Or in terms or EVE: we see a stagnation, no intention to strive for a “top” that has become totally unreachable any more, permanent frustration of the poor at at some point shrinking player numbers while the superrich make more and more accounts because for them it absolutely does cost nothing. Oh wait. Thats exactly what we see.
You are pretty much wrong about that, because I never advocated for people being equally rich or poor. You can have a fucktrillion ISK in your wallet, but if you want to own 300 ships, pay maintenance for 300 hangars. It’s not that complex to understand, if you buy 300 cars or yachts in the real world, you would need to pay lots of money just to have them.
Try to ridicule it as long as you want, you don’t get a real point here.
