Now I do. 
Well seeing as Uriel is 5 allegedly, that makes Frosty 4, which means that your mums are paying for your Omega accounts.
Iâm Alpha on all my characters even my main. The only time I was Omega is when Iâve trained the expanded Alpha skillset and did so by PLEXing (which was paid by selling loot stolen in Jita and elsewhere 
).
You could try making money the Frostpacker way, become an ORE thief.
Too low ISK density (large volume low value), I prefer to steal small volume large value loot instead.
(An old article but clearly demonstrates the point.)
1 Like
Yet here we are, discussing why the game is dying, and one of the more common refrains is that playing solo is what many people wish to do. You donât have to accommodate that, in theory, but if you want the game to grow, surely âyou must play with other peopleâ is a barrier a lot of casual players wonât want to cross?
I am not sure why you think me saying itâd be good to have some kind of alert would be contradictory to me knowing it can be blown up? Again, seems like a lot of strawman arguments.
EVE isnât thriving. And the players it has kept were the ones willing to bludgeon their way through the steep learning curve and imbalance against new players. I spent 8 years here, but I joined with around 20 other players from a forum. None lasted longer than 9 months, and almost all less than 2.
Ultimately, the mindset that EVE doesnât do things, and therefore never should, makes this thread, like so many other suggestion threads, a waste of time. Saying things like âEVE doesnât have to build around your lifeâ is such a bizarre take. We should all want EVE to build around our lives, and at least cater to us logging in more, engaging in what we can, when we can, which would provided far more targets and far more excitement for every player.
The idea that EVE is only for the hardcore is why it is going to be a shell of a game at some stage in the near future. When the devs sold it off rather than take the risk on how to fix their dwindling numbers, players should have understood the inference.
6 Likes
Itâs not just for the hardcore. It never has been. Casuals can and always have been able to find a life here. Join a larger corp that can defend you- serve a greater group. Help out. Why do you think that these things arenât possible? Not everyone has to go it alone. The lone miner without any friends that spends all the ISK he has buying a really big shiny expensive ship is going to get it blown up and not want to start at the bottom again, but thatâs not everyone.
If that little lone miner joins a corp that shows him how to grow the right way and protects him, he can then thrive in New Eden.
If you want to go it alone and cry about being destroyed, thatâs your choice. I went alone, but I was prepared. I knew how to survive. Not everyone is equipped for that. If you want to be casual, then join a large corporation and follow their directions. Eve has that option- learn to survive on your own or join under someone elseâs rule. That is New Eden.
1 Like
I think you meant to post this in the âEVE is thriving - why is it so successful?â thread.
Itâs insane. Telling people the âright wayâ to play a sandbox game. You get that right? Itâs not a sandbox game for all the people who leave, because their chosen playing style is frowned upon and actively stifled by experienced players.
Stuff like this is genuinely⌠I mean read it back one day, Iâm sure thereâs a part of you will realise talking about yourself and others this way is very, very strange
1 Like
Yes, that is commendable , especially the bit where you mine in a compliant Skiff to provide ORE for Frostpacker to building catalysts
Thatâs exactly what youâre doing here. Youâre trying to get Eve online to change the entire game because youâre unhappy. You get that right?
Well, I figured Iâd help out the Frostpacker because mining Veldspar is a difficult task for him. He needed my assistance.
Frostpacker is a modern day Robin Hood. He steals from the rich to give to the poor (himself)
1 Like
By the way what happened to the Dork?
I get that your loss was a disappointment within EVE, and I have empathy for that kind of loss.
But thereâs solo and then thereâs âextreme soloâ. Most people play MMORPGs as a âsolo, with the option to interact with other players when I choose toâ game. It means when you log in by yourself with only 40 minutes to kill, you donât need to gather a team together in order to accomplish anything, you just do your thing. But, if you have 3 hours on a Sunday evening, and you want to roam with a gang, you can.
It means having a network of contacts and friends and even enemies in the game give you options you wouldnât have in a single-player game.
However in your case, you went extreme solo, in nowhere space (WH), with your own personal POS, in either a single-player or very small corp named after yourself. You were literally alone in a cabin in uncharted wilderness. Thatâs going a little beyond solo play.
You didnât have anyone to watch your stuff for you. You didnât have anyone who could notify you. You very likely couldnât have defended it if youâd been there. Youâre blaming the loss and âEVE dyingâ on âgankersâ and the fact that EVE doesnât have a notification system to warn extreme solo players (like 2% of the player base) that their assets are under attack while outside the game.
If EVE had notified you, what would you have done? âIâm sorry honey, can you postpone this baby thing while I rush home to defend my POS?â
Thatâs not âgankingâ, not in WH space. Yes it was a blow to you, but thatâs what happens. People get sick, people move or change jobs, people have children and emergencies. If you choose to go extreme solo in literally the most dangerous area of a dangerous game, thatâs on you to arrange your own protection.
For what itâs worth, some people have cobbled together software that sends them notifications outside the game, and I think citadel players get emails or something if their assets are at risk. So CCP has taken some steps in that direction.
Just be aware here that when youâre arguing EVE needs to be more âcasual soloâ friendly, which sure, great, yes it should⌠but your own situation was not âcasual soloâ. Trying to blame âgankersâ or EVE for that particular failing is just you not owning up to the risks you took and accepting that sometimes those risks will cost you.
2 Likes
He posted an apology thread but it got locked and hidden for discussing bans (so I assume maybe he got banned for all his spam and whatnot). So I canât post the link here.
Drop me an EVEmail so I can reply back (the third-party webmail I use has some issues maybe because of ESI trouble or my adblock or whatever so can not write from it unless I reply to someone and am too lazy to sign in just to send you a mail with the link).
To be honest , donât care.
Casanova wonât be missed.
Again, you donât seem to understand the context.
The thread is about the constantly shrinking playerbase of EVE. It is fundamentally about the things that could change to improve retention of new players to address that issue.
Like I said, if we were in the âWow, look how much the playerbase has grown over the last decade, how do we avoid breaking that momentumâ thread, youâd have a point. Iâd be telling people to change something that didnât need changing and was backed up by a growing playerbase.
However I am pointing out that you are telling people âthe right wayâ to play a sandbox and that said sandbox doesnât exist for new players, whose existence is predicated on veteran playersâ play styles.
The difference is I am not telling other people how to play, I am saying the game may need to change to accommodate newer or more passive players who do not want to engage in that side of it. You get the difference, right? I am fine with veterans ganking, I just think it should be in a way that means the gankee has actively engaged in an activity that says they are happy to accept that risk, in an area that means they cannot complain.
Like I said, even my own scenario above I was fine with, except that Iâd have liked a mechanism to prompt me to come and engage in one of the two remaining windows in which a fight could take place. None of these things inhibit the ability of well resourced players to target players whoâve engaged in activities that make them fair game, it just raises the bar slightly as to what âfair gameâ means.
1 Like
Zaera has decided that you lost the argument, her oppinion is what matters as she ruleth over the forums and all that flyeth in New Eden.
As a conselation prize though, you win an ibis.
Some of this is completely right and fair, and I agree with much of it. FWIW I actually could have defended it and had done briefly in the past in a way that chased off some would-be attackers, and at least would have liked the ability to try in the second stage timer. As for the timing, it happened in the week after. We were tired, but I would have had an hour to play if Iâd known.
What I agree with - and always have - is that my chosen playstyle did make me a valid target. I donât blame the people who put the effort in to get that reward at all, itâs not easy to do and that is a good part of the game. Would I think that part of the game would have been even better with a fight, which win or lose, had two sides to it? Yes. Two things can be true.
I have never argued that the loss was unfair, just that it felt unsatisfying, like it happened entirely on someone elseâs terms, and that the lack of agency (which is at the core of everything Iâve said for new and old players) could have been avoided with a simple mechanism to create a proper fight. Again, for many players for many reasons, as you note, such a thing may promote someone staying subbed through a tricky period, and coming back into the game at regular intervals if the game prompted them, or they could set up assets in space without having to pro-actively be there in the specific period of attack to know it was happening.
What I disagree with is applying that same bar to players in hisec. That is (for me), the reason EVE is failing to retain new players, who either canât fight back, or donât have the inclination to. The mentality that merely undocking = fair game, the idea that there is no area of space that a player who doesnât want to engage, doesnât have to, seems like itâs missing something critical for so many potential long term graduates to the veteran playerbase and better PVP all round.
For what itâs worth, I never actively chose that play style and fell into it when I realised nobody was likely to come into WH space and engage with me as often as I had hoped
Regardless, I think accommodating that (and hopefully facilitating the group dynamic for those looking for different playing experiences while perhaps âplaying soloâ much of the time) is a positive for people and the more CCP do to encourage that, the better. We can say 2% of people want to play extreme solo, but that % may be higher in players who left, and more importantly, I think it would be significantly higher for players who want to play casual solo and who find hisecâs relative lack of safety as soon as they undock in anything theyâve actually worked hard for, a disheartening facet of the game.
1 Like