I’m thinking about playing eve again but when i left nearly two years ago I was really disstatisfied with how the game was constantly being nerfed. It felt that every time when i advanced a little spending real money I got nerfed back that little bit i gained before.
First when i maximized fighters, the carrier/super got nerfed bit by bit. Then I trained myself into a roqual. Although mining is not my thing. I actually mined 10 minutes with a rorqual before selling it again. Mining seemed to be getting nerfed back then really hard aswell. Then I got my characters to be able to solo/duo living in wormhole space. But a lot of wormholes spawn where added and later a core needed to setup a citadel. This made it unviable for me to run a citadel in wormhole space solo. Because pretty much any gang can come r*pe it.
I really loved the game how it was in 2017/2018 and I really want to play it again, but somewhere i still feel ripped off on real money investment and how it negated the feeling for progress back when i played.
Sometimes I ran into random people on discord whom also leftEve for the same reason. Kinda hoping things balanced out nowadays.
It will be destroyed at some point but usually its paid for in tenfold by then. So I see it as a disposable asset. Just a regular stick could be a good alternative back then. Not sure if they are still in the game though.
I hear you on the “everything I achieve you nerf” part. That sort of sequence has cost more than one game a lot of players.
I don’t EVE in the same ways you did, but from the things I do know about, I would say you left at kind of the ‘peak’ of CCP’s Chaos Era/“pull the rug out from under players every other week” experiment. (Yes, that’s actually something Hilmar said, and he actually said it like it was a good thing.)
More recently CCP has seemed to be easing up on their “the floggings will continue until morale has improved” tendencies. They put some buffs in for mining (though not really for Rorqs) and tried some improvements to industry.
On the other hand, they recently cranked up prices while announcing “most significant update ever!” for Fanfest, then did nothing but mumble about adding some undetermined stuff at some undetermined time, but hey you’ll totally be impressed, we’re sure.
So they’re still CCP, with all that implies.
As has already been mentioned, try it as Alpha for a bit to get the feel of things. Or maybe Plex for a month so you don’t have to drop the new “improved” rate of $20/mth.
If the game gives the fun it gave back then, before all the nerfing then the 5 euro increase is not so bad for the time I used to play. I ran two accounts which I paid for. But you can basically plex your account on a 3 day old character, so its not really a problem for me. Playing alpha is no fun if your used to being able to pretty much flying everything anyway But I just peaked on my accounts though and got about 50 bill in assets. Might plex for a month and see if I can get into it again.
The things that made you quit earlier (nerfs happening to things that many people flock to, citadels of solo players being destroyed when they cannot defend it) are still present. The game hasn’t changed much, so if you have not changed either, you will likely quit again.
That said, give it another try!
Maybe this time you’ll learn how to adapt new strategies before everyone uses it and it gets nerfed. CCP is usually very slow at nerfing, so unless you’re a very late adapter you have a few years before nerfs happen like the Rorqual nerfs. And maybe you’ll this time find other players to play with to defend that citadel. Or maybe this time you find something else in the game to enjoy, rather than feeling dissatisfaction.
Anyway, game is fun, so if you have changed for the better and have a more positive attitude this time you might enjoy it.
I didnt quitte over a destroyed citadel but because of the constant nerfing. I regarded a citadel as a disposable back when i played. The isk in wormholes easily offset any loss in only a day or two. Not sure if its still the same though.
The second option is considered problematic by players and developers, people complain about that option all the time (Muninn meta?) and will eventually get a nerf if the game is under active development. So for people chasing the current meta, your only way to do so with a positive attitude is to follow it before it gets nerfed. And to not be surprised once it gets nerfed, because a nerf is inevitable.
Early adapters find new strategies. Most people figure out the meta by playing with other players and they then abuse that meta strategy until developers change it.
Late adapters, like the OP, invest in a winning strategy only to get nerfed right after. Then pick the next best meta option and get another nerf! Nerf after nerf. And they are somehow surprised that this keeps happening.
Two options to deal with it without becoming unhappy about the nerfs:
stop complaining about the consequences of being a late adapter, be happy if you manage to get some time in before the nerf
think of your own strategies rather than following the thing that everyone else is doing
Third option I guess would be to be an F1-monkey with a large null group that does all the heavy lifting for you, then post smugly to everyone else who has an issue with CCP’s changes to the game that “you’re doing it wrong” and “it’s your fault for playing that way”.
You could then top that off even better, by playing according to the some of the oldest strategies in the game (null blobs) and tell people who’re out doing their own thing in the wilds of J-space they’re “late adopters who should think of their own strategies, rather than follow what everyone else is doing”.
New Eden can be taken in with a deep breath and held for 3 seconds before releasing and remembering that feeling of excitement of being hunted, the adrenaline that fuels your excitement before taking your next breath of New Eden.
That’s not really an option to fix the problems the OP has with nerfs though. Large null groups often adapt to the meta even quicker and will therefore more often get hit by nerfs to which they need to adapt.
If the OP has issues with being hit by nerfs, this isn’t a solution.
But I get the feeling that you didn’t mean it as a viable option, but meant it as a cheap ad hominem attack against my post.
So you missed the point of the post, I guess. And you’re also a bit fuzzy on what an “ad hominem” is.
When the emperor says “look at my fine fine clothes!”, it’s not an ad hominem to point out “but the emperor has no clothes”. It’s an observation.
When a guy who’s not on any sports teams starts telling you how to “create a winning team”, it’s not an ad hominem to point out that perhaps his talk isn’t worth much.
And when someone points out that a certain group of forumites absolutely love to tell other posters “problems with the game aren’t CCP’s fault, you’re just playing wrong”; and that therefore any advice they posted needs to be taken with a grain of salt, it’s not an ad hominem attack.
Any more than telling the OP that “they’re a late adopter not thinking of their own strategies just following the crowd” is an ad hominem.
It’s called checking the validity of the source.
So yes, the post was written with sarcasm and irony, and wasn’t complimentary. Hopefully you understand both the post and the meaning of “ad hominem” better now.
So, instead of addressing my arguments you instead attack my person in order to avoid having to come up with a valid counterargument.
Ad hominem attacks are frowned upon if you wish to have a rational debate: discuss the argument, not the person.
Or continue dismissing my arguments on the basis of ‘me being in null sec alliance, therefore an F1-monkey and therefore an invalid opinion’. If that is the path you choose, I may dismiss your arguments too – not on basis of who you are, but on basis of that your arguments make no sense.
Well sure. The point of the post is “check the validity of the source”. If the source of the advice hasn’t any relevance to your situation, feel free to question the value of it.
In your case, your own playstyle appears to involve hanging out in Null and occasionally attacking something with the help of a dozen or two buddies. Unless the target is a capsule, in which case you 'Brave’ly solo it.
This is a valid playstyle, but perhaps not pertinent to someone talking about having issues with nerfs in J-space, solo play, and the cost effectiveness of citadels in that region.
Second, take a look at how quickly you assumed the OP was a late adopter, following the crowd. They’re talking about the good times they enjoyed in 2017-2018, so that’s certainly not a ‘late adopter’ for using citadels in WHs. It’s also odd to see a Null blob-warrior telling a WH soloer not to “follow the crowd, but think of your own strategies”.
At any rate, the OP may be a late adopter or not. May be doing their own thing and thinking up their own strategies, or not. Insufficient information was presented to determine.
However, anyone using citadels at all, early or late, was affected by the need for cores and the citadel defense changes. I don’t think you can broadly assume anyone who disapproved of that change was a late adopter crowd-follower.
“Nerfs negated my feeling of progress” is a valid and common sentiment in many games. Sitting back in Null (seriously, the most over-farmed and “follow the crowd” area of the game) and saying “don’t use strategies that are known to be good, because hey if they’re good they’ll get nerfed” is simply being an armchair quarterback with 20-20 hindsight.
But I just peaked on my accounts though and got about 50 bill in assets. Might plex for a month and see if I can get into it again.