I’ve already seen a few come trickling in from Echoes, via the rookie channel. The hard core ones will stay, as per the history of Eve itself 
2 Likes
On the other hand, if you have a thousand players paying $10 per month you’re likely to keep them playing month after month after month after month and your income strategy does not conflict with making a quality game that attracts long-term interest. F2P cash shop games can spike income but the F2P business model is inherently self destructive as it sacrifices game quality to maximize cash shop pressure. The long-term prospects for a F2P game are uncertain at best and you need to keep producing entirely new games to replace each one as it dies. In the long run if you have any confidence at all in your design talent you’re far better off making quality games and maximizing the subscription model.
1 Like
…and there is the summary of everything wrong with F2P games today. The entire industry cares nothing for long term. They focus only on maximizing short term profits. This is where “Publishers” and the like come in. Groups like NCSoft take quality games and turn them into hollow soulless cash machines that are discarded like a dead hooker when there is no life left in them (sometimes when they are still profitable. See City of Heroes)
3 Likes
I keep having odd mental flashes…
“long-term prospects” would those be unkillable concord tier2 miner frigates?
damn, now my dad joke gene says I’ll have to do a name change on one of my prospects, to make it labled long-term
The last positive update to eve online I can remember was in 2009 when they updated the graphics. I would not consider any update after that to be positive in my 13 year run with CCP.
2 Likes
Clearly they’re actively trying to destroy their game. The only people who like these recent changes are streamers who are given free ships and isk every day, or people who in someway or another aren’t affected by the changes and their isk faucets haven’t been affected.
Imagine sitting in a room full of null sec players and saying… Hey guys we want to increase ship destruction so we’re going to reduce your income, and increase hostile activity in your systems. Then he informs the room that he is in fact brain dead… Everyone proceeds to look at each other nodding in agreement and simply saying “makes sense.”
Technically, you have that backwards.
But other than that, yes thats what they have directly said they want.
How? The actively want more ships to be blown up, and they are actively working to reduce peoples income. I honestly don’t see what’s backwards about that?
They want to reduce income and banked isk, and destruction of assets is a mechanism in that, not a goal in of itself.
We’re literally saying the same thing in different words. There’s no disagreement here. I’m so confused ok. Lol
It’s almost like most Null Sec senior players actually understand about the overall health of the game, and understand that a scenario where all of Nullsec has effectively infinite ships and killing the other guy doesn’t matter because it’s already replaced is bad.
They want to be able to hurt the other guy by blowing his ship up and as a result they like the idea of reduced income, especially since things like the ESS don’t actually reduce income, they just mean you have to work for it meaning the smart & invested players can actually make more income even by stealing from the lazy.
Not so sure that’s a good idea.
Wealth isn’t evenly distributed and everyone will be potentially hit in the same way (minus those that never leave a station). The large wealthy corps/alliances can survive, but the poorer corps/players maybe forced out of the game or into larger wealthy corps/alliances.
So how else are you going to break through the trillions of isk worth of stockpiled ore out in nullsec and the excessive isk fountain from anomalies ratting, also in nullsec, without hurting these mythical “poorer corps/players”.
1 Like
No easy option now, they should have been dealing with this a long time ago.
If you’re going to treat all players the same way, there isn’t anyway you can cause a large reduction in the wealth of the rich without hurting the poorer corps/players.
The reduction in materials within the ore helps, but again it’s far too late. There’s already far too much wealth within some alliances.
1 Like
Ok, so your option is “don’t do anything about it and let EVE stagnate.” Got it.
You could always tax the wealthy, but even that isn’t a fair option and there isn’t any justification for doing so.
Problem is to nerf income to those that need it will make life a lot harder for them, whereas it would take a long time for the wealthy to really notice.
CCP will do what they think they should do and lose people along the way.
Okay, so this is out.
Okay… so this is out.
Alright, so all of your complaining basically circles back to “Let CCP do their thing.”
Look how simple that was. Now, who are the devs of this game again?
By introducing new optional isk/material sinks, vanity things. Like Palatine Keepstar. It could cost reasonable x5 of common one. Not crazy x200 only Yodic ever going to build
At which point it becomes power creep instead since it actually becomes common. Or if you keep the only one restriction it fails to be any kind of sink.
One per region might be reasonable enough restriction.
Add new structure I dont insist on Palatine.
AT-like ships. Corp/alliance decals and skins. Something for big entities, for members to be proud of, to relate to. Some RP space-monuments. Planet terraformation projects. Moon relocation. Dyson spheres.
Its sci-fi isnt it, they could use imagination a bit more often.