Wish you all the best with RL issues and hope everything works out fine.
Fly safe o/
1 Like
Are you sure about that?
Updated Sunday at 14:35
A character can be transferred to another account via the “Character Transfer” service through the Account Management page. A single character transfer involves a transfer fee in form of a credit card payment of 20 EUR/USD, 17 GBP or 1199 RUB.
https://support.eveonline.com/hc/en-us/articles/203465481-Character-Transfer
This was updated on Sunday.
Are you saying it is false?
Nice edit.
You yourself, as OP, brought it up into topic.
Thats makes it fair for us to discuss it.
You are selling for 65bil. So the math is:
Thats 19,697 PLEX units at 3.3mil each at current market value.
Cash conversion is 688 EUR/USD, for 2860 PLEX at 99.99 EU/USD a batch.
Please don’t reply to the troll, the issue has been reported.
I think there’s a consensus here that things need to change war declaration wise, and thank you for the well wishes.
I’d like to clarify that I don’t think ‘banning war decs’ is the greatest solution, there are clearly better ones. Maybe isolating corps by their age or player count or something like that before a complete rework is initiated.
I also strongly believe that armies of alternate accounts are having an effect on the numbers, it would certainly disguise some newer players deciding against eve online.
I’ll bite, this post is good:
Are you one hundred percent certain falcon deleted your posts? I honestly don’t believe the moderation team would do that.
High Security definitely needs a re-balance, perhaps that’s what this is about.
Was this you?
https://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=1456486
And this:
https://evewho.com/pilot/Beachura
Lol that flipping between Perkone and Player Corps.
How about this one of you selling accounts back in 2013?
Note: “Disclaimer I am NOT the original owner of this character” on Kydin, which you sold.
“Interesting” history to say the least.
I gave jump fatigue as an example in my original post. They saw that something was broken so they destroyed it completely and it’s taken years to get it back, and even then they’re still tinkering. The difference here is that fatigue was the solution to the problem. We haven’t been given a solution yet (CCP admitted as much - this is “temporary”). I honestly doubt that a solution will ever be put forward that doesn’t result in hisec being made a complete sanctuary from PvP.
In the past, it was accepted that EVE wasn’t the game for everyone. It’s always been a niche game that appeals to sadists, where scamming is encouraged, ship loss can be devastating and the player base actively try to break the game (see Burn Jita). I’m not saying HTFU or gitgud, I’m saying that EVE shouldn’t shy away from what it is.
What does it say when a sandbox game, primarily focused around PvP is concerned about players docking up because they can be killed? Or that new players are being driven away because of this? These players wouldn’t have made it long term anyway. There is always a bigger fish who is willing to beat you senseless, even for the wardeccers. A huge fish was created by the player group to beat down the biggest fish (see WWB). If players can’t accept it, then maybe EVE isn’t the game for them.
Hey Savoy, thanks for your well thought out reply.
Honestly I don’t think I’d have stayed around if I’d have been forced to be locked up in an NPC station during my first two weeks.
What does it say about a community when some people are effectively telling lots of the public not to join a game? All successful games have the ability for new and not-yet-mature players to be able to develop themselves before being enveloped into the world of destruction and cold that this game represents.
The organisation responsible then becomes concerned that they are missing out on revenue. I mean, even more of a clue of this tactic being an issue is the huge Kill / Death ratios here.
As many other players have mentioned, it’s older players looking for a ‘safe’ way to kill defenseless players without recourse, it seems they are the ones that could be accused of wanting safety primarily.
1 Like
I know you gave jump fatigue as an example, which is why I told you that it came back closer to what it was as things developed. Getting that balance right is difficult, but I know it is about right because I was using capitals a lot recently. I do not think that the jump bridge changes will be as terrible as some people make out.
I think this concept of niche players and people don’t get Eve is a bit of a smokescreen at times, it is like a prop to hang on to, like a crutch for someone with a broken leg.
This is not just a PvP game and it has different layers, nullsec is the anything goes and hisec is the most protected area for newer players and casuals. For my part CCP should balance the hell out of hisec around casual and new players and you should understand it is not so much against you but for hisec. The point I made about being able to end the war dec is critical to this and the CSM have this in mind too from replies I have had on the CSM thread. The way you phrase this as Eve is not the game for you I can say back to you that perhaps hisec is not for you if you expect nullsec levels of freedom.
I have been pushing for something for the defender to blow up to end the war dec, it is the only way to balance war decs, and it has to be made possible for your targets.
1 Like
One could agree those jump bridges, whilst an incredibly divided solution might not be as horrific as people think they are…
Another evangelista who want only “chosen” ingame.
Hint: PA want all ingame, not only few “chosen”.
2 Likes
The game lets anyone create an account, even those who don’t have the money. Except those of course who have been banned.
I’m answering @Beachura here as well as you both make similar points…and to Pred as well who seems to have not read my entire post - or if they have, they are ignoring it and trolling anyway.
EVE will never be anything other than a niche game for a niche market. Anyone who thinks otherwise is deluded. Sandbox games have limited appeal and PvP focused MMOs have an even harder time with it. EVE has survived longer than any other MMO I can think of and is only matched for longevity by WoW (which is younger) but it’s player numbers have never been stellar (forgive the pun) and never will be. The reason why it’s maintained it’s player base is through being a horrible game for horrible people. Can you imagine The Mittani every being allowed to touch WoW again if he’d made his drunken speech at Blizzcon? It wouldn’t have been a temporary ban that’s for sure and no WoW player would want him to play again. I’m not saying CCP endorsed his words or his behavior, quite the opposite, but his persona is the stuff of legend amongst players and people are happy to fly under his banner. Hell, this game allows (and encourages) scamming, pirating, racketeering, ransoming and pretty much everything that doesn’t involve exploiting RL. How many players have been lost to falling for a Jita local scam? How many to a ransom that wasn’t honoured? How many to a courier scam, or a duel request?
By it’s very design it’s a harsh game and I would wager that every player who has been at the game for more than a year has had the crippling ship loss that nearly bankrupted them. If they haven’t then I’m amazed. It happened to me twice within the first year of playing, first time in lowsec and then to mission rats (oh the shame…). How many players are lost to this?
I agree there has to be a balance to wardecs, but every solution I’ve seen proposed is fundamentally flawed. I’ve made my views clear in those threads when I’ve seen them, including about the defensive structure - I won’t go into it here for the sake of keeping my posts on one page(ish) 
On jump bridges, I actually see this as a positive step as it allows NS groups to move their cap fleets quickly through their territory. This means more cap fights hopefully which can only be a good thing. The problem is that it’s taken far too long to get to this point as it always does with CCP.
1 Like
The reason I play this game is for the challenge against people who are good at the game and damn nasty in game and often on the forums too.
I am sorry, but every time me and others like me go into details about game mechanics we get told that we do not understand Eve and it gets a bit wearing, I understand Eve. What I also understand is that no one, not even the self proclaimed elite will continue to do stuff if they have or believe that they have no chance at all. You only have to ask those war deckers who stopped when the watch list went. Does your comments apply to them, as equally as they do to me? I want you to face that uncomfortable truth, can you? It may seem like I am attacking you, but seriously I am not, I want you to step back and think.
I am talking about specific mechanics that create a victory point which ends the war dec, I am in favour of a structure that can be rush attacked and destroyed causing a fight and in doing so puts the control of the war dec and its end in the hands of the defender. Those players who do not get Eve will not even try, but those player s that do will. What are you scared of, what don’t you like about this, that someone could actually beat you and end the war dec, and yet in doing so you get a load of kills?
I will repeat the issue, the most efficient way to end a war dec, is to not log in, because you are hoping that the war decker will see that he is wasting his ISK and therefore will spend on on someone else who is more active. Having all this control on the attacker is a mistake in game design in hisec. Because don’t forget hisec is not the anything goes area that you and so many others think it should be. It already has mechanics to make it less dangerous, however they don’t really work well enough.
This state of hisec warfare is not good for any of us.
In terms of jump bridges it is a place where they can be interdicted and held up. It offers opportunities…
2 Likes
But now Eve must be model for Mainstream Asian mobile MMO game? That is real reason why PA acquire CCP, Eve Echoes. That is now main product and goal for CCP. Question is will Eve Online follow Eve Echoes or Eve Echoes will follow Eve Online, but bussines logic say that less successful product will follow and transform to successful one.
To be financial successful Eve can not be niche game. It was possible when was managed by Island company funded by Island investors, but after 15 unsuccessful years even Island investors get tired and get rid of CCP. New owners working in highly competitive environment and would not allow stagnation. Their only choice is Boom or Bust.
That is a reason why all that “niche game” talks are past tense and for game success, inside Eve, we need all:
- Content
- Commitment
- Community
3 Likes
I would actually like to see this as a subset of wars… not to be part of, as wars should be total open conflict… but having a system where two corporations/alliances can engage in limited scope objective based challenges would be interesting; put some more “lighthearted” competition into the game.
Though to speck directly to war victory, that is a hot mess, some objectives are difficult to quantify. Take for example one of our more recent wars… we were paid to disrupt a mining corporation, we did so for the contracted term, there were no kills needed (did get to ransom a freighter though, HORRAY!). In the end, we call it a win, but to quantify such a thing… how?
2 Likes
It is an open conflict, just that there is something in space that should the defender in the war dec destroy it the war ends. No need for theme park stuff, this is Eve.
1 Like
Firstly please let me make this clear - I’m not elite. I’ve never claimed it and it wouldn’t be true. I’m a fairly reasonable player who can multibox pretty well. I’ve not once disagreed that wardecs need reworking or that the balance is badly wrong. When a developer changes the game in a way that ruins a playstyle, it’s the developers fault that people leave - see watchlist changes/jump fatigue etc. When a player leaves the game because they are fed up with a mechanic that has been in the game for 15 years interfering with their playstyle, then that’s the players choice. They built their playstyle around the game as it was when they started.
Don’t get me wrong, CCP should definitely be concerned about why players are leaving and investigate. However, the very selective use of the sledgehammer in this situation is what gets at me. Other areas that need reform more urgently are being seemingly ignored.
Ok, I want to talk this through and not ■■■■ on you or your idea. That’s not my intention. I want to highlight what I see as issues in what I understand your proposal is:
Lets say aggressor puts down their structure which has X HP. I see different outcomes depending on how this structure works:
- Structure works like a Citadel & has timers
A small group isn’t going to be able to compete with the wardec corp at the timers and has no chance of ending the war early. Only large groups can compete and end their wars. You might promote fights, but in all likelyhood these wardecs will never happen again. Smaller groups are going to suffer most here IMO.
- Structure has no timers
Any group can AFK the structure down with polarised vindi’s, talos’s or bombers around downtime and you won’t get any competition over the structure. If a small group does attempt during peak hours for the aggressor, they’ll most likely be crushed. Large groups can muscle their way through and always win whatever the time.
I ask this honestly and I really want to know whether you can see why I don’t think the system will work? I don’t dismiss ideas without thinking about them or troll. I genuinely don’t think this will work.
No, by definition what you indicate would be a limited engagement. It has a win condition attached to a specific location claimable by a specific entity that then brings forth a preset conclusion. Many FPS games have these kinds of engagements, you have described one. While I think these could be quite enjoyable from a content generation standpoint they are by no means a replacement for open war.
For a long time people said there was an issue and it was ignored, however times have now changed. Hisec used to work, it no longer works, 15 years means nothing if the balance is out of kilter and people don’t bother. Just because it had been right and worked does not mean it will continue.
The sledgehammer happened because people saying there was an issue were told to HTFU and it was left without any investigation and allowed to get to such an unbalanced state that it was creating the loss of players.
In terms of the structure idea there has already been some discussion on it in the CSM minutes thread and elsewhere, but nothing official.
If the structure has timers then they have to be set in the defender of the war dec, not in the TZ of the attackers such as the war decker. And it has to be possible to rush attack it.
The preferred option is not to have any timers, and the onus is on the war decker to war dec people in their TZ otherwise what you said will happen. However that is not a bad thing, because you may have war decked someone for passing farming so if it is outside your TZ that they attack it then tough, poor target selection on your part.
However I would expect that you will place them in a suitable location to defend them, also these things can be changed as hisec develops in a better way as the onus is on shifting the balance to the defender in hisec, not continuing with the current state. This then can be adjusted as people get more organised and better corps develop in hisec.
The best situation that could happen is people grouping up with other war defenders to take them down. The object is to create a strategic objective that could result in a fight which is applied in all other parts of the game.
If you want open war then go to nullsec. You are choosing to operate in hisec and demanding that it be open war, it is not going to continue like that. In effect all this does is give something that the defender can blow up to end the war, but it is the same as it was previously the object is getting them in space and possibly eager to fight. Not everyone will, enough will. But you have to get over the issue with your own thinking, hisec is not like nullsec, open war with no conditions is not working in hisec.
3 Likes
lol
No, I am stating when fighting a declared war that it should be open, and not a one sided engagement.
Recently I OPENLY flew around with 1000 PLEX in my cargo hold (was in a Cruiser) during a war to get them to undock, it was just me, nobody else, I had 4 people try and gank me but the 12 online and in system… yes 12… in the defending corp would only chat with me from safety. If folk don’t want, they don’t want… a piñata is not going to help.
That there should be a fair and equitable war mechanic that encourages conflict and rewards multiple levels of participation for corporations large and small. Where the two sides, if they desire, can come to various agreements enforced by the system architecture so that things are given meaning instead of people playing whack-a-rando. Where people don’t need lurk in NPC corporations or form massive alliances for “wardec protection”, or move assets in a never ending shell corporation game to avoid the responsibility of possession of said assets. Where corporation membership actually means something instead of just the tag you have on your name that day and after months your history is longer than Marmites war listing?
Hisec should be different than Null or Low or WH, that is the point of the different areas. But it should contain elements of those areas to prepare you for the larger scopes of what they represent but in a way that is less punishing and more predictable. That way you can see the opportunities and go after the ones you want at the pace you prefer.
1 Like