This was a great title CCP.
All of my subs have escaped as of today.
13 Likes
can I have your stuff?
2 Likes
gave it to @Anderson_Geten
2 Likes
I know right?
I kept playing this because i had some money in it…
I had a retriever fit with 3 WCS. Mining in a WH, i could sustain a certain amount of risk. I’m not willing to do it anymore.
It’s not the first sreww up on CCP’s part. Messing around the scanning interface? Why? The “temporary” changes to industry? It’s like they want to dig this game into the ground on purpose.
If the tendency stays, i’ll already be putting my money some place else. Not much keeping me here already.
3 Likes
Could be worse, could be The Great boot.ini
(Great way to cloak Windows users though)
Its against the law to dock to the left in a UI. CCP just following regulations moving it to the right…
Im kinda lost. Your retriever will now have 1 warp core stab and 2 inert stabs or mining upgrades… if you get attacked, you still had to warp, whats the difference?
1 Like
Because i already have to put up with the industry nerf. I play my part, mining in a wh, filling with what this industry needs. And now they smack me around the head with this? It not so much about this specific nerf. It’s about every other one they did before.
I don’t trust this company.
5 Likes
CCP doesn’t make choices in isolation of either data or calculated benefits (for themselves). If they “nerf” industry or anything related to PvE, it’s because they understand that the pendulum has swung too far in that direction, and that there’s a lack of balance between production and destruction. Do you think that resource scarcity was added for “content”? No, it was added because the game had too many players doing nothing but mining 12+ hours every day. Do you think the Trigs were added for “content”? No, they were added because after years of nerfing high-sec PvP, the lack of destruction was causing inflation to spiral out of control. Of course they didn’t address this by actually restoring the PvP to its original state, because that would’ve made 87% of the population squeal like live pigs being cut into with a steak knife. So they gave you “new PvE content” instead, enjoy! And why do you think they capped WCS at +2 with this latest change? I can tell you: because they’re not keen on engorged grindbears being able to avoid 100% of the risk inherent in small-scale PvP encounters even when they’re AFK and on autopilot (like coming across a single gatecamper or a war target).
You reap what you sow. Bring a combat escort for those times when another 2 points of warp strength would’ve made a difference for you.
6 Likes
Which would be great if they told the truth, which they dont.
Their reasoning on the patch notes is clearly a lie, along the same lines as their reasoning for ECM changes and their reasoning for Cores and their reasoning for etc etc etc
I dont have a problem with them changing whatever they want for their benefit but lying about it is just crappy.
No spine or no brain or both CCP
4 Likes
Some player might not share CCP great vision for the game.
1 Like
They’re lying because if they told the truth, some devs would wind up floating in the harbor that week.
How well do you think “hi guys, we’re going to add cores to stations because there’s very little incentive to attack them and quite frankly we intended more risk for this gameplay element instead of people using them as glorified space huts in order to avoid paying market taxes and production fees without any drawbacks whatsoever” would go with the folks who do nothing but mine all day, and whose wet dream is for the game to have a PvP toggle?
“Too much station spam is hurting the server megahertz” is a much easier explanation to swallow for players whose only other game on Steam is one of those “bus driving simulators” made by one of those devs with the “GmbH” appended to their names (the Germans really love their real-life labor sims).
1 Like
They could simply remove CONCORD from highsec to increase destruction as most of the players would enjoy.
1 Like
So sneaking it on them and lying works better?
I doubt it.
And screw those guys, what about people who arent like that?
You know those of us who werent suckered into buying cores in the first place?
And do you honestyly buy the whole “ECM was changed because it made people sad” BS? I dont think anyone bought that lie at all.
Quite frankly it all smells of micromanaging by a CEO that has no clue whats going on. If they wanted scarcity AND conflict, why not just reduxce the number of belts WH entrances etc in a system to one?
2 Likes
Yeah, what about all 147 of them?
Remember who plays EVE today.
Why are you trying to build a case for being lied to?
2 Likes
It’s not about building a case or being lied to.
It’s about players who developed skills to a game which those devs probably never started playing. Then the devs go looking at some pie chart and decide to cut off an arm to the game because… uh i dunno.
I don’t even know who’s supposed to benefit from a change of should would could on CCP part.
They don’t actually care anyway. “ohh they criticize everything we do so we won’t actually to understand the consequences to our nerfs”
Yeah, real smart.
1 Like
Because it’s an acceptable trade-off for having 90% of the player population remain in the game believing in Santa Claus.
And I don’t mind, because CCP isn’t lying to me, because I know better since I see the entire game and not just the asteroid rock in front of me.
An honest CCP is the developer EVE deserves, but not the one it needs right now.
2 Likes
Well, cant help but agree the current developers are not the ones it needs either
But in regards to the Nullification lies, what would be wrong with them saying “We think Nullification is too good, so we are going to nerf it,but here’s the deal, we will put it on other ships in exchange, just itll be a lot more fiddly to use. Also, WCS is balls, but we dont knowwhat to do to fizx it, so we are knocking it down to max +3. Sound fair?”
People may not agree but its closer to the truth than “We are introducting interesting tactical nuances”
Those players developed their skills out of flawed desires and principles, and you’re giving CCP way less credit than they’re due.
Players were never intended to do nothing but grind PvE all day, every day. Such players were supposed to be the outliers. Instead they make up nearly 90% of the population. Of course this also shows that CCP screwed up pretty majorly by fostering this sort of player progression. It genuinely didn’t exist during the game’s first few years, and started becoming a thing around the turn of the last decade.
I think it’s a decent solution, actually. It’s making more than a handful of ships (i.e. those with many low slots) viable for avoidance gameplay, and the active nature of the mod penalizes AFK play. It’s how the item should’ve functioned from the very beginning. That said, there’s room for improvement. Maybe it can use scripts with varying effects, for example.
1 Like