# The EVE Online Ecosystem Outlook **URL:** \ **Category:** Dev Blogs\ **Tags:** feedback, official\ **Created:** [December 27, 2020, 11:25am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-eve-online-ecosystem-outlook/287097 "2020-12-27T11:25:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 44
**Author:** ![Daichi\_Yamato](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/daichi_yamato/32/252995_2.png) [@Daichi\_Yamato](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Daichi_Yamato)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2021, 12:02am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-eve-online-ecosystem-outlook/287097/997 "2021-03-01T00:02:47Z")
Whilst you may be sitting on your stock piles, not everyone is. Ships and equipment are being made, traded and consumed. ---
**Author:** ![Gerard\_Amatin](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/gerard_amatin/32/481361_2.png) [@Gerard\_Amatin](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Gerard_Amatin)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2021, 7:39am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-eve-online-ecosystem-outlook/287097/998 "2021-03-01T07:39:56Z")
> [@Deriger](#): > > This right here is some ■■■■■■■■. The only way to reach your goals is to take it directly out of our inventories. I’m sitting on my stockpiles because you ■■■■■■ ore in null. That may be a safe move, but not the most profitable move. Why not sell the ores while they’re worth a lot, before CCP re-adds more ore supply in another redistribution step? ---
**Author:** ![Hug\_Motsu](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/hug_motsu/32/264439_2.png) [@Hug\_Motsu](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Hug_Motsu)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2021, 7:35pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-eve-online-ecosystem-outlook/287097/999 "2021-04-17T19:35:17Z")
> Blockquote > to ensure that player choices matter, the loss has meaning, and to ensure that the universe is dynamic and changing. > I’m sorry @CCP_Dopamine, but your conclusion is wrong. 80% (?) of PVP = PVP vs PvE-ships. This is not “dynamic” or “changing”. **PvE’ers loss to PVP has meaning, not the other way around!** _a gank ship is under 20-40m & a PvE ship is +100m up to 4-5b and more… and pve ships cant even apply damage to the PVP ships…_ so in conclussions only the PvE player’s choice matter. “should I undock or should I stay docked”. That’s the only choice. Also, DBS is still at D. and unstable… lols, there are corp/alliances that sacrifice ships just to raise the DBS. sorry but no, your game mechanics are clearly not working as is… and you talk about nerf capital ratting and marauders even more… lol… AS IS… i risk +5b for just the nid hull… to get 24m ticks. whats the point to even buy omega, if all the “gameplay” is in t1 frigates, destroyers, and cruisers… **seriously… can you guys at ccp stop taking drugs?** ---
**Author:** ![Tursiops\_Truncatus](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/tursiops_truncatus/32/232426_2.png) [@Tursiops\_Truncatus](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Tursiops_Truncatus)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2021, 8:39pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-eve-online-ecosystem-outlook/287097/1000 "2021-04-17T20:39:18Z")
> [@Hug\_Motsu](#): > > 80% (?) of PVP = PVP vs PvE-ships. This is not “dynamic” or “changing”. > **PvE’ers loss to PVP has meaning, not the other way around!** > _a gank ship is under 20-40m & a PvE ship is +100m up to 4-5b and more… and pve ships cant even apply damage to the PVP ships…_ > > so in conclussions only the PvE player’s choice matter. “should I undock or should I stay docked”. That’s the only choice. > > Also, DBS is still at D. and unstable… lols, there are corp/alliances that sacrifice ships just to raise the DBS. > sorry but no, your game mechanics are clearly not working as is… > and you talk about nerf capital ratting and marauders even more… lol… > > AS IS… i risk +5b for just the nid hull… to get 24m ticks. > whats the point to even buy omega, if all the “gameplay” is in t1 frigates, destroyers, and cruisers… > > **seriously… can you guys at ccp stop taking drugs?** Rattati and Pearl Abyss has done more to force cash paying customer to quit EVE and Start playing Elite Dangerous and Star Citizen than anyone in the history of EVE. You would not believe the amount of ex EVE players that left EVE for Elite Dangerous and Star Citizen. A good number of them left EVE after Rattati started destroying the player driven sandbox and forcing players to play EVE the way Rattati wants to play EVE played. Rattati, EVE was awesome before you and your manifesto destroyed the player driven sandbox. The only ones that likes Rattatis changes are gankers, the folks you pay to troll the forums, and the Developers of Elite Dangerous and Star Citizen. No one has done more for Elite Dangerous and Star Citizen business than Rattati has over the past year. We are starting to see why everything Rattati works on fails. Rattati has no clue what the player driven sandbox experiences is and was. I said experiences because what made EVE stand alone was the fact that you could play EVE your way. You could have 1000 people doing the same function but it was being done 1000 different ways. Thats what made EVE stand alone from other games. Rattatis forced game play puts an end to what was the most unique game ever created and kills the sandbox experiences for good. ---
**Author:** ![Hug\_Motsu](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/hug_motsu/32/264439_2.png) [@Hug\_Motsu](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Hug_Motsu)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2021, 4:23pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-eve-online-ecosystem-outlook/287097/1001 "2021-04-18T16:23:17Z")
> [@Tursiops\_Truncatus](#): > > Rattati and Pearl Abyss has done more to force cash paying customer to quit EVE and Start playing Elite Dangerous and Star Citizen than anyone in the history of EVE. well. I don’t know anything about this… where the paying eve customers has gone - if they have gone etc. But I’m pretty sure the changes in EVE come from the director Helmar. and the people you talk about are in charge of carrying out those orders. I understand that EVE had to change somewhat, but I do not agree that these changes are needed to be dragged out for +2 years. also I do not agree that changing the same game “settings” on 3+ “knobs” - at the same time, is particularly smart. Finally, I do not agree that these changes will produce the outcome that CCP says/thinks it will… to put it simple, it creates a distrust in CCP for me. _They either lieing on purpose or are just idiots?_ ---
**Author:** ![Ramona\_McCandless](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/ramona_mccandless/32/468438_2.png) [@Ramona\_McCandless](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Ramona_McCandless)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2021, 4:48pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-eve-online-ecosystem-outlook/287097/1002 "2021-04-18T16:48:16Z")
> [@Tursiops\_Truncatus](#): > > the folks you pay to troll the forums Wait, Hilmarr owes me money? ---
**Author:** ![Teckos\_Pech](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/teckos_pech/32/375283_2.png) [@Teckos\_Pech](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Teckos_Pech)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2021, 11:34pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-eve-online-ecosystem-outlook/287097/1003 "2021-04-19T23:34:29Z")
> [@Arrendis](#): > > > **Abundance breeds Complacency and Scarcity breeds War** > > Can you please stop peddling this nonsense? Scarcity doesn’t breed war, _imbalance_ does. If resources are scarce everywhere, then there’s no point making war. You’re using up what you have to get nothing. 😛 Yes, this is just errant nonsense. It is something I expect to see in a shitty novel or television show. Scarcity is going to make thing more expensive and as such people will be less willing to risk losing those things because replacing them will take longer. Please…just stop with this. It is stupid beyond belief. ---
**Author:** ![Hug\_Motsu](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/hug_motsu/32/264439_2.png) [@Hug\_Motsu](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Hug_Motsu)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2021, 11:46am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-eve-online-ecosystem-outlook/287097/1004 "2021-04-24T11:46:03Z")
> [@Teckos\_Pech](#): > > Please…just stop with this. It is stupid beyond belief. > [@Arrendis](#): > > > **Abundance breeds Complacency and Scarcity breeds War** > > Can you please stop peddling this nonsense? IRL , this could be true thou…? In an online pixel world where you don’t have life-threatening conditions… like food etc… yeah this is true. its ccp trolling at its best. actually, in eve-online, abundance breeds war, and scarcity breeds complacency and station spinning and unsubbed accounts. ---
**Author:** ![Arrendis](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/arrendis/32/432594_2.png) [@Arrendis](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Arrendis)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2021, 1:23pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-eve-online-ecosystem-outlook/287097/1005 "2021-04-24T13:23:34Z")
> [@Hug\_Motsu](#): > > IRL , this could be true thou…? Nah, even IRL, if nobody anywhere has anything to _take_, then nobody starts a war to take what isn’t there. ---
**Author:** ![harelys](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/harelys/32/267586_2.png) [@harelys](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/harelys)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2021, 1:26pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-eve-online-ecosystem-outlook/287097/1006 "2021-04-24T13:26:36Z")
> [@Orca\_Platypus](#): > > Establish a sustainable role for Rorquals and Orcas and do a general balance pass on mining ships to ensure that they each have a unique role and they are balanced in terms of wealth generation and survivability. see the whole damn orca nerf is freaking dumb. what do they really think that is keeping the ore market a float right now? ccp is gona completly screw themselfs over when it comes to this change because it gona make alot of people wana quit. i mean if your looking to make it where orcas and mining ships are nerfed then make it where concord responds even faster because then you will have alot of people to deal with that will cry about the whole orca nerf. ---
**Author:** ![Othello\_Warspite](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/othello_warspite/32/146796_2.png) [@Othello\_Warspite](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Othello_Warspite)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2021, 3:56pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-eve-online-ecosystem-outlook/287097/1007 "2021-04-24T15:56:17Z")
Historically, I can literally only think of one war that involved a significant component of “resource scarcity”. Even then, it was “resource poor, military excess” beating up on a military weak, resource rich colony. (In other words, Arrendis is right) Wars typically are over power, and more likely to occur when there’s underlying resentment. Thing is, in EVE, if a region is taken, the residents are pushed out, rather than becoming subject to the victors. This acts as a brake on conquest, since taking a region dilutes power, rather than increases it. Scarcity Breeds War is marketing, not a lesson anyone could draw from an actual history of war. ---
**Author:** ![hellokittyonline](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/hellokittyonline/32/244672_2.png) [@hellokittyonline](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/hellokittyonline)\ **Post date:** [April 24, 2021, 6:52pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-eve-online-ecosystem-outlook/287097/1008 "2021-04-24T18:52:35Z")
You mean you want them to be fodder for your gate camps? ESS might as well not exist if the thief isnt given a considerable leg up. Honestly the pay is still complete ■■■■. CCP should be taking WAY more from the krabs with this system but cant suffer the loss of so many BOTS. ---
**Author:** ![Xuixien](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/xuixien/32/416896_2.png) [@Xuixien](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Xuixien)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2021, 3:21pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-eve-online-ecosystem-outlook/287097/1009 "2021-04-25T15:21:53Z")
People _do_ fight over resources. If some people aren’t willing to risk losses in conflicts over resources then they are free to not have those resources. ---
**Author:** ![Arrendis](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/arrendis/32/432594_2.png) [@Arrendis](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Arrendis)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2021, 3:27pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-eve-online-ecosystem-outlook/287097/1010 "2021-04-25T15:27:59Z")
> [@Xuixien](#): > > People _do_ fight over resources. Yes. But that means there are resources to fight over. When everywhere has nothing, there’s nobody fighting over the resources that don’t exist. ---
**Author:** ![Xuixien](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/xuixien/32/416896_2.png) [@Xuixien](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Xuixien)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2021, 3:30pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-eve-online-ecosystem-outlook/287097/1011 "2021-04-25T15:30:38Z")
> [@Arrendis](#): > > When everywhere has nothing This is hyperbole. I can’t think of any area of space that has “nothing”. People are currently fighting over LowSec anomalies, which, as far as I’m aware, can spawn in any LowSec system. LowSec systems with ice belts are also seeing a fair amount of traffic and contesting. And people are fighting over moons: [Battle Report Tool](https://br.evetools.org/br/608249692924cb001b44c9f9) You seem to have a strange straw man idea of what the current situation with scarcity is. Maybe NullSec isn’t as lucrative as it used to be, but people are fighting over resources, even knowing that every capital they lose is going to cost much more to replace later on. ---
**Author:** ![Arrendis](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/arrendis/32/432594_2.png) [@Arrendis](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Arrendis)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2021, 3:39pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-eve-online-ecosystem-outlook/287097/1012 "2021-04-25T15:39:20Z")
> [@Xuixien](#): > > This is hyperbole. I can’t think of any area of space that has “nothing”. People are currently fighting over LowSec anomalies, which, as far as I’m aware, can spawn in any LowSec system. > > LowSec systems with ice belts are also seeing a fair amount of traffic and contesting. But Lowsec’s still a very different beast than nullsec. And if you object to the word ‘nothing’, then: when everywhere has the same low level of resources, people don’t risk _needed_ strategic resources in order to lay claim to nothing they didn’t _already_ have. And no, people in nullsec aren’t fighting over resources. That’s not what the current wars in null are about. PAPI v Imperium, FRT v AOM, etc etc… no. Not about resources. And even there, they’re not risking the strategic assets over nonsense. PH just announced their ‘big’ assets for their push on our capital… will be _battleships_. Seriously? Is that supposed to be considered risking strategic assets? Linking a BR over a moon fight in lowsec, immediately after CCP’s announced _R4s_ will be more valuable… that only proves the point: the resources have to _exist_ to be fought over, and take a look at who’s willing to throw away caps: Scary Wormhole People, who make their money… in the places where scarcity hasn’t hit. Gosh. Shocking. ---
**Author:** ![Xuixien](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/xuixien/32/416896_2.png) [@Xuixien](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Xuixien)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2021, 3:45pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-eve-online-ecosystem-outlook/287097/1013 "2021-04-25T15:45:19Z")
> [@Arrendis](#): > > But Lowsec’s still a very different beast than nullsec. This is a shifting goalpost. > [@Arrendis](#): > > when everywhere has the same low level of resources This isn’t the reality. > [@Arrendis](#): > > And no, people in nullsec aren’t fighting over resources. That’s not what the current wars in null are about. Not sure who you’re replying to here but it isn’t me: I made no such claims. > [@Arrendis](#): > > PH just announced their ‘big’ assets for their push on our capital… will be _battleships_. Seriously? Is that supposed to be considered risking strategic assets? Yeah, we’ll probably see more situations like this in the future. Warfare is gonna change a bit, but there will still be wars. > [@Arrendis](#): > > Linking a BR over a moon fight in lowsec, immediately after CCP’s announced _R4s_ will be more valuable… That wasn’t an R4 moon. > [@Arrendis](#): > > that only proves the point: the resources have to _exist_ to be fought over They do. > [@Arrendis](#): > > Scary Wormhole People, who make their money… in the places where scarcity hasn’t hit. TDSIN hasn’t lived in WHs for a while. You should probably try to get in the loop before you talk about things. EDIT: And yeah scarcity changed things in WHs too. ---
**Author:** ![Arrendis](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/arrendis/32/432594_2.png) [@Arrendis](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Arrendis)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2021, 4:03pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-eve-online-ecosystem-outlook/287097/1014 "2021-04-25T16:03:31Z")
> [@Xuixien](#): > > This is a shifting goalpost. No, it’s noting that different areas of space play by different rules. To control a moon in lowsec, for example, you don’t have to maintain the ihub, so you can control access to the system via jammers. There’s no bubbles. That all means people are willing to engage _differently_ over the same kinds of resources, because the risks are different. All those capitals? They weren’t bubbled. They also knew that there wasn’t going to be a supercapital escalation. All of this weighs into the decision of ‘how much risk is there in this?’ > [@Xuixien](#): > > This isn’t the reality. For each type of space, it absolutely is. All of nullsec has the same level of resource redistribution as the rest of nullsec. All of lowsec has the same level of resource redistribution as the rest of lowsec, etc. > [@Xuixien](#): > > Not sure who you’re replying to here but it isn’t me: I made no such claims. You claimed people are fighting over moons. That’s true in lowsec—where, again, the risks are lower—but it’s not true where the large-scale destruction happens. It’s not true where the economy-driving destruction happens. > [@Xuixien](#): > > Yeah, we’ll probably see more situations like this in the future. Warfare is gonna change a bit, but there will still be wars. But will those wars actually matter? The things that CCP’s been trying to accomplish with the economy overhaul wasn’t ‘will there be wars?’ but things like _will supercapitals die?_ Will the warfare that happens mean the large strategic assets get risked? Because if they don’t, then they just continue to keep piling up, the way they have since basically they were introduced. This means that a warfare landscape that doesn’t include supercapital warfare… will be a failure. And right now, that’s what CCP’s setting up for. > [@Xuixien](#): > > That wasn’t an R4 moon. Given statements made by Kenneth ‘The Leaky Sieve’ Feld, I sincerely doubt _anyone_ in a position to make decisions about which moons to hit is betting against another moon-ore redistribution. God knows we’re not. > [@Xuixien](#): > > TDSIN hasn’t lived in WHs for a while. You should probably try to get in the loop before you talk about things. Yeah, their zkill activity definitely shows they’ve completely abandoned j-space. Maybe you should watch what they _do_, not what they _say_. And scarcity hasn’t impacted j-space nearly as much as it has everywhere else, no. ---
**Author:** ![Xuixien](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/xuixien/32/416896_2.png) [@Xuixien](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Xuixien)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2021, 4:18pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-eve-online-ecosystem-outlook/287097/1015 "2021-04-25T16:18:11Z")
> [@Arrendis](#): > > No, it’s noting that different areas of space play by different rules. Which is a shifting goalpost. You said people wouldn’t fight over resources during scarcity because they can’t afford the losses. I pointed out that people _do_ fight over resources and currently _are_. Now you’re splitting hairs and moving goalposts: “well that’s lowsec it’s different”. Right. > [@Arrendis](#): > > For each type of space, it absolutely is. All of nullsec has the same level of resource redistribution as the rest of nullsec. All of lowsec has the same level of resource redistribution as the rest of lowsec, etc. This is another shifting goalpost. You said “all areas of space” having the same low level of resources, now you want to split hairs again. > [@Arrendis](#): > > You claimed people are fighting over moons. That’s true in lowsec—where, again, the risks are lower—but it’s not true where the large-scale destruction happens. It’s not true where the economy-driving destruction happens. Maybe this was true in the past, but it’s changing. You’re operating on an outdated paradigm. > [@Arrendis](#): > > But will those wars actually matter? It depends on what you mean by “matter”. This is such a vague and nebulous term that I can’t even respond to it. > [@Arrendis](#): > > but things like _will supercapitals die?_ Dunno. Don’t care. We had wars before cap proliferation and they “mattered” as far as I can tell. > [@Arrendis](#): > > Because if they don’t, then they just continue to keep piling up, the way they have since basically they were introduced. So? > [@Arrendis](#): > > This means that a warfare landscape that doesn’t include supercapital warfare… will be a failure. And right now, that’s what CCP’s setting up for. Non-sequitur, please explain how wars without supers will be a “failure”, especially considering the constant lamentation from the community about caps. > [@Arrendis](#): > > Given statements made by Kenneth ‘The Leaky Sieve’ Feld, I sincerely doubt _anyone_ in a position to make decisions about which moons to hit is betting against another moon-ore redistribution. God knows we’re not. Okay. > [@Arrendis](#): > > Yeah, their zkill activity definitely shows they’ve completely abandoned j-space. Maybe you should watch what they _do_, not what they _say_. Go back a few pages and you’ll notice a pretty clear trend. Doing things in WHs isn’t the same as living in WHs. TDSIN got evicted and they’ve been derping around KSpace for a while now. I do things in WHs. What’s your point? So far you haven’t seemed to have one, and are instead desperately trying to throw out fallacies to maintain an indefensible position. Myopically pointing out TDSINs involvement - I don’t see TDSIN on the other side of that BR? C’mon man, just give it up. ---
**Author:** ![Arrendis](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/arrendis/32/432594_2.png) [@Arrendis](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Arrendis)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2021, 4:25pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-eve-online-ecosystem-outlook/287097/1016 "2021-04-25T16:25:35Z")
> [@Xuixien](#): > > Which is a shifting goalpost. You said people wouldn’t fight over resources during scarcity because they can’t afford the losses. _Because they can’t afford the losses_. That means they’re taking into account the different levels of risk inherent in each part of space. So no, not shifting goalposts at all. Sorry if you didn’t recognize that the underlying conditions contribute to peoples’ decisions. > [@Xuixien](#): > > This is another shifting goalpost. You said “all areas of space” having the same low level of resources, now you want to split hairs again. No, just a clarification. All parts of k-space have been impacted. Each part has been impacted to a specific degree. Trying to compare conditions between lowsec and null, or null and high, is futile and only serves to muddy the waters. You need an apples-to-apples comparison, or you pollute your data. > [@Xuixien](#): > > Maybe this was true in the past, but it’s changing. You’re operating on an outdated paradigm. Really? So lowsec’s had something comparable to M2 in the last six months? > [@Xuixien](#): > > We had wars before cap proliferation and they “mattered” as far as I can tell. Exactly. Those wars took place under significantly different conditions, where the capitals and supercapitals weren’t present. In order to get those wars to matter again, the number of supers needs to go _down_. > [@Xuixien](#): > > So? It leads to stagnation across the game. We’ve seen this time and again over the last ten years, and even CCP’s acknowledged this is the case, and the supers need to be dealt with. > [@Xuixien](#): > > Non-sequitur, please explain how wars without supers will be a “failure”, especially considering the constant lamentation from the community about caps. No, you see, you misunderstand. I’m not saying anything about ‘wars without supers’. I’m saying ‘wars where supers aren’t risked by fighting other supers’. Supers will continue to be used when the risk is low, and the other side only has subcaps, or regular caps. That’s the problem—and the big cause of ‘constant lamentation’ from the community about caps. > [@Xuixien](#): > > I don’t see TDSIN on the other side of that BR? I don’t see a massive number of dead caps on the other side of it, either. [Previous page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-eve-online-ecosystem-outlook/287097.md?page=43) [Next page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/the-eve-online-ecosystem-outlook/287097.md?page=45)