Taran Lazarus for CSM 21 — More of us playing more of the game
I’m Taran Lazarus. I’ve watched EVE make many changes; I want to help it make some more.
The people running EVE want more players, and so do we. Word of mouth is the best form of advertising. Getting more of us playing more of the game gives us more experiences to talk about, more of EVE to show and explain, and more reasons to invite other people into it. That’s a shared goal I’d like to work toward on the CSM.
Why I’m applying
Properly functioning economic systems are one of EVE’s foundations. Mining, production, trade, transport, and the use and destruction of what we build connect players across the game. Those connections give our activities consequences beyond the individual task we’re doing.
I think continuing to apply real-world economic principles and experience when developing game mechanics matters to EVE’s development and longevity. Mechanics influence what people produce, what they consume, what risks they take, and how they organize. Understanding those incentives helps us consider what a change will encourage and how its effects will reach other players.
I’m a restaurant guy. I turn flour and water into different things people want, and making that work means understanding the people on both sides of the counter. A server and a line cook experience the restaurant differently, just as a family of six and a couple on a date want different things from it. I look at EVE the same way: different people, different roles, and different reasons to play, all connected through the same game and economy. I’d like more of those people to find more of EVE worth trying.
I think too often we’re trying to find the thing someone will do for the rest of their life. That isn’t a sustainable expectation. People’s lives and interests change. I want to tweak things enough that trying another part of EVE is worth it—even if you fail once or twice, and even if you eventually decide to try something else.
To other EVE players, I’m a nullsec guy. To everyone outside the game, I’m an EVE Online player. I don’t want to use only 15% of my game.
My EVE story
I’ve joined and been kicked out of corporations and alliances. I’ve rented in nullsec and tried to live in my own wormholes. I’ve repeatedly failed miserably, and I’ve kept playing.
When I first started playing, I started hisec mining because it was something I could do while caring for an infant. Mining can mean AFK mining in highsec or gas huffing in a wormhole. Where and how you do it changes the attention and involvement it demands. The choices I made let me keep playing in a way that fit my life at the time. I think recognizing those different schedules and lifestyles is how we get more out of what we have.
EVE has people who play constantly, people who log in once a week, and people who return once a month. Different activities have different demands, and the same activity can be performed in different ways. I think that range is something we should embrace.
PI is another useful example. You can make choices about how frequently you attend to it, and those choices influence your results. I’d like more activities to offer that range of involvement, giving players room to adjust how they play as their lives change.
EVE’s persistence matters to me, too. I’ve never heard anyone speak positively of other games where everything gets wiped to null every season or expansion.
I’ve played EVE for more than a decade, and I wear EVE shirts because I’m a fan. Sometimes someone notices one while I’m out in public and asks about the game. Then they ask whether they’d enjoy it, and I tell them no.
My expertise and perspectives
My strongest experience is in player organizations, industry, markets, supply, and logistics. These perspectives reflect that experience, alongside areas where I would learn from the people who regularly take part.
Factional warfare
I’ve tried to get into factional warfare a couple of times, looking for a mixture of income, fighting, and involvement in the war. LP was a motivator, and that’s fine. But my experience felt like either easy LP farming or getting blapped by someone doing it in a more organized way.
That left me asking what we were fighting to gain. Beyond the LP payout, what does winning give the people who participated? What does holding that space allow us to do, and what would losing it cost us?
Those consequences matter because they give people a reason to take a fight, organize together, and defend what they’ve gained. I’d like the income, the fighting, and the purpose of the war to connect more clearly.
Unstructured PvP
Most of my experience with unstructured PvP has come from doing PvE and discovering that I’m in a PvP situation. That’s part of EVE, but I don’t think that experience alone represents the goals of people who deliberately seek out PvP.
When someone describes themselves as a great PvPer, I imagine them talking about testing their ability against other pilots. I’d want to understand how well the opportunities available in the game serve that ambition. What makes a fight worth seeking? What makes someone willing to engage? What keeps both players coming back?
Those encounters grow out of player decisions, and EVE’s mechanics and economy influence those decisions. I’d look at what gives people reasons to be in space, cross paths, and take a fight, informed by people who regularly pursue them.
Ships, gameplay, and the HUD
I think we all want the same thing: simple to use, with tons of options. But even an “easy fit” isn’t easy if you don’t already know what you’re doing. Knowing which modules to fit is only part of it. You still need to understand why they’re there and how to fly the ship.
Even with T1 modules, putting that ship together can become a scavenger hunt. Someone who wants to try an activity has to work out what they need, find the parts, and get everything together before they can begin.
I’ve helped prepare and supply ships for other players. I want fitted ships.
A new solo player should be able to choose an activity, find a basic ship prepared for it, understand the skills and total price, and buy it ready to fly. They can go try something, lose a ship, and get another. They can learn to customize as they go.
Industry and markets
I’ve purchased, transported, assembled, and listed ships to support other players’ activities. That work has given me a practical view of how pricing, availability, production, and coordination connect.
I’d consider economic changes through those connections: what behavior they encourage, who supplies the activity, who uses its output, and how the effects reach people elsewhere in the game.
A functioning economy gives people reasons to do different jobs and trade with one another. Making it easier for a player to obtain what someone else produces can create more activity for both of them.
Sovereignty management and logistics
I’ve experienced corporation ownership, independent renting, and life within larger organizations. Moving people and supplies, preparing for activity, and keeping ships available have been part of that experience.
Every activity has a starting point. For a fleet, that may be staging with a suitable ship. For someone else, it’s obtaining materials, preparing a colony, or reaching a market. I’m interested in what helps people reach those starting points and keep participating.
Highsec and new players
My mining story is one reason I value the different ways people play EVE. Highsec supports people with different ambitions, schedules, and responsibilities, all contributing to the wider game.
For new players, I’d focus on the path from curiosity to participation: understanding their options, finding people to play with, and getting enough context to learn from what happens to them.
EVE and Vanguard
I’ve played both DUST and Vanguard. Vanguard has some good mechanics I haven’t seen elsewhere, and it draws on lore and ideas that are our own. What excites me is its connection to EVE Online. That was why I was excited about DUST, too.
The experience I want is straightforward: we’re capsuleers. We fly our ships, dock, walk around our station, grab the guns and armor we made off the wall, and drop into a first-person shooter where our objectives have consequences for the wider universe. Our production, our ships, and what we accomplish on the ground all have a place in that experience.
Vanguard also gives us another way to invite people into our universe. I can hand someone a controller and have them say, “I understand this.” They can start with a style of play they already know. Connecting their objectives to the same universe where we fly our ships gives that participation meaning for all of us.
We can talk about details like “Maybe that gun shouldn’t be green,” but we should definitely bring multiple gameplay styles together around a common focus. We were pioneering that connection with DUST more than a decade ago. If anyone can make it succeed, we can.
What players can expect from me
I want fitted ships. A new solo player should be able to choose an activity, find a basic ship prepared for it, understand the skills and total price, and buy it ready to fly. They should have a practical way to try the activity, lose a ship, and try again.
I’d bring my experience purchasing, transporting, assembling, pricing, and selling ships into that discussion with Fenris.
Fenris and players both want more people playing EVE. I’d work with them toward that goal and be direct about decisions I think help or hurt it. When we disagree about a change, I’d argue its effects on players, the incentives it creates, and what could work better. That’s part of working together to improve our game.
We’re pushing buttons and looking at pixels, and what we do becomes articles and news stories. Those stories come from people participating.
When we started playing, we wouldn’t have guessed decades. Now half a century feels within reach.
It’s just a game, but it’s our game.
I’d like to hear what makes your part of EVE worth coming back to, and what gets in the way of doing more of it.