What I find funny is that the initial post states things that were intended, obvious and predictable …
… yet it kind of sounds like there’s actually something in there that’s a problem, surprising or not intended.
Also I want to point out how Kezrai manages to point others at biases she’s unaware of in herself.
Anyhow …
Everything she states has been intended by CCP, except reduction of destruction. Everything. Lots of changes with exact that predicted outcome. Trading too. Of course. There were changes for that too. So what’s this supposed to be about, except a massive troll post anyway?
What’s the point she’s trying to make, except stating the obvious and trying to make everyone believe there’s a problem?
You mix RL risk with “risk” in a computer game. In EvE you never risk anything except wasting life time (except you are a hard core plexer). Ships / stuff is ammunition. Economic rules apply (don’t “risk” what you can’t replace easily), this has nothing to do with RL risks.
For example I tend to take more and more risks during a solo play session, also depending on success. After a couple of wins I don’t care about a loss anymore, so ending the session with my ship dispatched is perfectly fine, and quite likely.
Yeah, because it sitll holds. Do you go against say 10 - to - 1 odds? Do you fill up your hauler with massive amounts of stuff and run it around for the excitement of possibly getting ganked? Risk seekers are people who take on risk on purpose. If you aren’t doing things that are inherently risky and are instead doing things to reduce your risk - i.e., are being prudent then you are risk averse. Now in a video game people might have a higher tolerance for risk than in real life, but still if you are doing things to protect your stuff in game…guess what you’re risk averse.
This entire concept of calling people risk averse as if it were an insult is one of the stupidest f**king things I have seen on the forums.
Not exactly but close, I would read that as “I want to engage in this pvp/pve mechanic where I have a chance at coming out with enough isk to do it again even if I die.”
Chance being the keyword, people need to dream otherwise its all in vain.
Actually a good example of this is the event’s data site’s:
The negative is you are forced to fly an astero if you want to be successful.
The positive is you are surrounded by npc stations in low so even if you are successful a few times at least you can drop off some loot and go again into the frey where you might die knowing hey even if I die at least I won’t be hit super hard because I was able to get some of my winnings to some type of safety even though they will have to take a 2nd risk retrieving those items and transporting them back.
Doing these event low sec data sites makes it optimal to fly in a pvp ship and that is why it is a great, a good amount of risk a good amount of pay and a good chance you will end up in a fight.
But 95% of other pve activity forces you to be in a super pve ship with no pvp capabilities and this imo is a missing opportunity to make eve a lot better as a whole.
TBH another good example of great pve is pochven well almost, the drifters are stupidly op and if you jump a gate with anything bigger than a desi are you pretty much dead instantly. (a fix for this would be that no npc can point on a gate or station but can warp off themselves if they feel threatened forcing the player to have a point.)
But the good part’s is that it is dynamic and in open world and not in some instance and on top of that they are not all focus on the player like some stage they are in their own little world fighting each other waged in some eternal war that you can witness and influence at any time in what ever ship you feel like (95% chance its a pvp ship so you can get some action on the side), its amazing tbh I wish CCP learn a lot from poch adapt it and start introducing it into normal eve.
This is imo what makes Eve great, everyone seeks some amazing story to tell and risk aversion kills the chances at great stories.
Our corp discord has a “flex” channel where you can post attempted tries at fighting against the odds, its pretty great because then you know you won’t get flak for dying to something avoidable when the reward for succeeding is so massive.
Forcing people to rely on fleets does not work as intended people will 90% of the time try to find a way to solo it, even if that means flying a fit that is completely useless for anything else.
Literally only one ship …
… or are you defining successfull wrongly as “the best possible outcome” ?
That’s only true for the audience that doesn’t care about that. It’s pretty clear that CCP doesn’t want that audience around too much, as they’ve openly stated several times that they do not wish for people to be self-reliant/sufficient and rather have them group up. Your point isn’t valid, because the people who don’t want this will be replaced by people who do.
No one is being forced. Those who don’t like it leave …
… and those who do stay.
There’s plenty who do, otherwise people wouldn’t be forming corporations in the first place.
Its pretty easy to see that there are less players engaging in Eve since this effort to rid the universe of long standing/paying veteran players began.
Some of the developers who now have control were likely very young when eve launched.
The problem is if CCP ever cared about its players, if it ever had a code of ethics – it can no longer be trusted. This development team is not out to make a really great game for the community (like I believe they once did).
You’re right. I was my first time seeing CCP doing this back when they’ve released CrimeWatch 2.0.
I know that “switching target audience” can end in a desaster for game developers …
… but CCP has done it before and they’re doing it again … (this time at a far more rapid pace than last time)
… and the game still isn’t dead.
Wow, who would have thought they’re not running this game out of purely idealistic motives!
Some of us [like me] are just not interested in pvp. No matter what things change in Eve, no matter what CCP does or does not do, I’m simply not interested in that aspect of online gaming. I have enough drama and stress in real life. I don’t want more of that when I play a game. I play this game for fun. Period.
If a situation developed whereby my safe things in an NPC station were no longer safe, I would let my subscription run out and I would stop playing Eve.
Wow, the PvP crowd really does need things broken down into baby-talk for them, don’t they?
You seem to be confusing “CCP purposely made changes to the economy, and gave reasons for doing so”, with “CCP got the results they hoped for, and they’re good results”. I’m not sure where you picked up the idea that the post was supposed to reveal some unexpected new thing.
The OP is entirely to point out that CCP is once again addressing the wrong solution to the incorrectly identified problem and creating a result that is bad for the game.
Believing that CCP is doing what they’re saying, for the reasons they’re saying it, is a fools game that’s been demonstrated to be false many times over the years. Believing that they know what they’re doing and it will all come out right in the end because hey, they’re the devs and they must know what they’re doing, is similar.
You yourself frequently rail about how stupid CCP has been to “give in” to the carebears (a fantasy to begin with) and “dumb down” the game.
Here’s CCP’s own statement on the goals of the ecosystem balance:
** * Mission
To continuously regulate the unique ecosystem of EVE Online in order to provide a fair and vibrant playground full of diverse and rewarding opportunities for all players
Vision
All EVE Online players are deeply engaged in a universe full of non-repetitive activities with intuitive risk/reward ratios while not competing with cheaters
Goals
Increase veteran engagement through nurturing conflict
Improve economic health and opportunity through updates to resource and risk distribution.
Severely impact cheating through prevention, detection and enforcement**
The OP clearly (well clearly to anyone who can read with comprehension) states that CCP’s changes are NOT ACHIEVING or even heading in the direction of these goal. Perhaps you feel differently. If so, please feel free to point out any actual facts that support your case.