Welcome to Jester's Trek.
I'm your host, Jester. I've been an EVE Online player for about six years. One of my four mains is Ripard Teg, pictured at left. Sadly, I've succumbed to "bittervet" disease, but I'm wandering the New Eden landscape (and from time to time, the MMO landscape) in search of a cure.
You can follow along, if you want...

Tuesday, April 9, 2013

Quote of the Week: Jump on them

Quote of the week honors goes to my fellow CSM8 candidate Malcanis, who dropped this gem while chatting on the Lost in EVE CSM8 debate with me on Sunday:
I don't believe everyone in high-sec is a carebear.  I don't believe that everyone who doesn't PvP in high-sec is a care-bear... A lot of people have got an idea that it's one-sided, that they're not going to win, and their only real conception of PvP in EVE is someone basically jumping on them.
For the debate, I was paired up with Malcanis, Psychotic Monk, and progodlegend, which made it kind of an amusing group for me since I've endorsed all three of these candidates for various reasons.  And I was pleased that all three did pretty good or better jobs at the debate.  progod is still kind of feeling his way around what it would mean to be a CSM member, but I kinda suspect he'll have a whole year to figure this out...

That's such a lovely quote, though, that I had to reproduce it.  The discussion was about the level of risk in high-sec and how CCP could adjust the level of risk there without breaking what EVE is.  Malcanis has some very interesting ideas in this regard but it's the core of those ideas -- rather than the specifics -- that are really sound.  There's a misconception floating around out there about the high-sec care-bear.  While some of them directly choose to be high-sec care-bears, a lot more of them are forced into that choice by EVE itself and it's hard for them to break out of it.

Another excellent CSM8 candidate, Ali Aras, wrote up a whole piece on this choice and why she thinks some players make it.  The full piece is definitely worth your time.  Go give it a read.  But she essentially agrees with this idea, and so do I.  As she puts it, the early game doesn't teach you anything of what you need to know about EVE PvP and in today's game, attempting to learn on the fly is much more difficult and much more likely to just lead to a string of embarrassing loss-mails.  "The net reward for risk-taking is demoralization and a sense that the game is unsafe, unfun, and unfair," she says.  Yup.

Pay attention here, because this bit is important: this is why any attempt to "force" high-sec care-bears away from their chosen life-styles or attempts to make high-sec so unpleasant that they will voluntarily give up this way of playing EVE are doomed to failure:
  • those who have directly chosen this life-style already know the alternatives and reject them; and,
  • those who have been forced into this choice are not being given clear paths to any alternatives.
The first group is not going to give up their high-sec way of life no matter what you do to it.  The second group is going to see their single alternative reduced to no alternatives and go play some other game instead.

I still believe CCP can and should greatly expand the potential audience for EVE Online but before they can, this issue is going to have to be addressed.  I've already brought up the idea that the entire early-game NPE needs to be taken apart and rebuilt (something Ali agrees with).  Hopefully CCP Seagull -- who's got to be staring this problem in the face by now -- will also have some ideas and I'll get a chance to go to Iceland and talk to her about them.  ;-)

EDIT (10/Apr/2013): The original version of this post listed CCP Sunset instead of CCP Seagull.  I regret the error.  Imagine how often this is going to happen if I also have to remember all their real names, too...

If you haven't yet voted in the CSM8 election, please do so!

And feel free to go listen to the full Lost in EVE debate schedule.  I might have said a few things of interest in there somewhere, too, as well as in the Voices from the Void candidate debates that I took part in a couple of weeks ago.


  1. The question is, does EVE needs players who are unable to overcome absolutely wrong preconceptions?

    Doe EVE needs to move to the way where WoW did where every mechanic that dumb players could mess up was removed as "too hardcore"?

    Do we need to protect those who are too dumb/lazy to do something so little to protect themselves as fitting a DCII instead of the third mining laser upgrade?

    I'm not talking about forcing everyone to the "station trades and speculates to be able to afford the Guardian-Vexor he'll fly in AT" level. I'm talking about the outright braindead flying a Badger with cargo expanders, 10 PLEX in the hold, autopilot or a faction fit T2 BS with small lasers in lowsec.

    1. As usual you have it all wrong... Did you even read the post? It is not about how people don't want to play, it is about the PvP Learning Cliff. NOTHING in the tutorials prepares a noob for the realities of Interacting with Live Players... as the game ages so do the older players and their skills go up and their experience goes up and noobs are TBH, just griefed into submission... And these noobs are players who COULD one day be very very good at PvP IF THEY HAD A CHANCE.

      Gev... you were a dumbass noob once... we all were. But dumb can be fixed with training and learning and experience...but as the playerbase grows and as the number of older players grows, noobs have less and less of a chance to learn what a DCU2 IS much less how to skill up to fit one before they are griefed right out of EvE...

      And you can only "force" player OUT of the game... you can't force them to play the way you feel is best. May I ask YOU Gevlon... is there any way in hell I could FORCE you to be a carebear? No. You are going to lay the game you want to play and if it aint here... then a game you DO want to play.is just a few clicks away... isn't it?

      As for the truly braindead... the players who have been here long enough to have learned better and still shitfit... well, they are legitimate targets in any game... =]

    2. dumb can't always be fixed. just read his blog.

    3. "Gev... you were a dumbass noob once..."

      He still is. This is rather obvious from his own blog, as well as his comments on other blogs.

    4. TurAmarth: There is a lot of out-of-the game resources one can learn from, if one is inclined to. Nobody has to be a "dumbass noob" nowadays. Noob as in 'new player', yes, but learning curve is not as steep as it was before.

      EVE lacks in game tools (like EFT for example), more extensive in game information and has somehow suboptimal UI (it's better now after recent expansions, and I have also gotten used to it), but critical information is not hidden from new players.

      Out of the game knowledge/resources are common for other MMOs too - in WoW mentioned above, most of theorycrafting is and always was done outside of the game, using specialized tools and databases (just like EVE).

      WoW was pretty much streamlined and simplified in recent year(s) - the whole leveling pve content was nerfed to the ground and there is mostly no challenge in this part (or rather zero effort required) - it would be like doing every epic EVE arc in T1 cruiser fitted with t1 modules on 1 month old character without ANY problems. By catering to the lowest common denominator (probably 3 years old child in case of WoW), the entertainment from world PVE was removed for many gamers.

      And that might be a slippery slope simplifications might lead to.

    5. I don't think anyone is saying we need to dumb the game down and start handing out participation ribbons. I think everyone agrees education and tools are the problem.

      Fitting, probably the most important skill in all of Eve, is not handled anywhere in the tutorials beyond, "You need a hacking module for this mission.".

      Tanking mechanics are not handled, no flavour of it. I remember a brief mention to the difference between an armour rep and a shield rep on when the rep happens in the tutorial from when I ran it a year ago, but that was pretty much it. A functional example of the difference between active and passive isn't there. Kite taking isn't there. And transversal tanking, an idea almost wholly alien to almost every other game in the world isn't there. The tutorial just flat doesn't cover them to any degree a newbie could get a real idea of any of how to use them, much less when.

      All of it, all of the base building blocks of PVP, have to be learned from other players, youtube videos, guides, and forums. The tutorial just flat doesn't cover them.

      And ALL of that is before you even hit the problem of being able to look at your overview and instantly know the rifter is there to point you, do you even know what point is?

      Starting to see how utterly and incomprehensibly bad the game is at teaching you to play it?

      No one is saying make any of that stuff easier, just more accessible. I know that is a bad word, but in this instance I don't mean dumb down, I just mean tell the newbie all of this stuff actually exists in the first place.

  2. Some interesting points and it raises some equally interesting questions.

    1) Do miners mine because they don't understand combat well enough and its the only way they can make low risk ISK?

    2) Is fitting too complicated and acts as a barrier to encourage players to engage in combat and / or PvP?

    3) Does low / null have enough risk / reward for high sec players to 'dip into' without having the local residents simply farming those rewards and leave nothing for the high sec players to experiance?

    4) Should high sec allow more oppertunity & activities? "You can drag a horse to water but you can't make it drink" - if players won't move to low / null for whatever reason is it now better to improve activities in high sec to keep those players happy rather than forcing them into low / null where they are clearly uncomfortable heading.

    5) Should missions be changed to be similar to PvP to train players to 'think' and fit similar to PvP so that the leap between the two isn't as large?

    6) Should mission rewards scale with economy so that players always get rewards relative to the costs incurred to ensure that players can still earn a 'good' amount of ISK to ensure their continual interest in the game?

    1. 2) I can't test-fit in-game. In my opinion, that's a problem. I have to buy it and fit it--which of course I can't do if I'm even wondering if I want to train the appropriate skill for a module.

      4) "More opportunities and activities" is something that should always be the right answer for every section of space. This is a sandbox--the more tools, the better.

      5) What if missions actually involved another player?

      My 2 cents.

    2. #5 has been my greatest disappointment with Eve. After all the advertisements and things I read about Eve being pvp any where...I need pvp and pve gear just exactly like every mmo I've played. I need vastly different tactics for pvp and pve just exactly like every mmo I've played.

    3. #2 Hell, yes. CQ let's us watch TV, but doesn't offer a fitting tool? Ludicrous.

      Fitting in stations could be the most important tutorial of all. If I didn't have EVEHQ and Neocom to lean on, I wouldn't still be playing the game after a year and a half.

    4. Yes #2 was big on my list as well.

      Most ships you can tell that they have a 'theme' or a 'planned fit' based on the bonuses and rough hinting towards one tank fit over another; so its massively frustating that they don't just GIVE us that fit and then let us mess around with it afterwards.

      Even if it means that every nooby who buys the ship ends up with a cookie cutter fit it'll mean that they will have a DECENT fit rather than making it up with various mixed guns, shield & armor tank and other such 'lolfits'.

      As far as the fitting window is concerned I think that any game where you depend on an OUTSIDE tool MORE than the game itself then the game has failed.

      Even simple things like seeing the cap situation when only a few modules are enabled; most ships won't be running a repper (for example) all the time so its not a very accurate presentation of the cap situation as the modules can be turned on and off as needed.

      I still think that EVE REALLY needs a simulator - someplace where you can not only load up a new ship and / or fit for free but also be able to FLY it and try it out.

      Even if you find a good fit for a ship it may not meet your play style and you'll find that you've just wasted your time and ISK on a piece of crap.

      Hell you could train in a simulated environment, get used to the various PvP tactics and it could even act as a good encouragement for new players who can jump into the simulator and try out a big ship and get them into the idea of working up to that ship so that they'll have something to work towards!

      Even at a technical level I can't see it being too much of a problem as the game environment doesn't change - its just essentially an private instance (like a mission jump gate but not able to scan down).

      I think the problem is that its just a 'nice' tool; its not a conflict driver or anything that really adds a huge amount for vet players to 'do' so I can see it always being on the back burner.

  3. I always wondered why all those NPC missions have absolutely no relation to how real pvp (or even everyday life in nullsec) works.Is it so difficult to produce a set of realistic missions that prepare people to live in null? Maybe make a mission arc, Navy Certification or something.

    * Run a sequence of guarded gates in a frigate
    * do a jump-and-return to gate under fire
    * run a sequence of bubbled gates in a cloaky bomber
    * evade scanners by rewarping and looking for probes
    * act as a tackler in a fleet of NPC battlesips
    * etc

    1. I've thought about this myself and it would be _awesome_.
      Additional ideas:
      *Assault a miniature NPC POS, and reinforce it.
      *Perform a (suicide?)-gank on the correct NPC ship coming through a gate, among many other NPC ships that you're not supposed to kill
      *Scan down an NPC in a specifically named ship in a specific system (who will be doing something like mining, etc.), warp to the site, and kill it. It will attempt to evade by warping out, etc.

  4. My dream on this has always been for CCP to give us a tool to write the stupid NPE ourselves and a better way to browse the tutorial missions we create.

    I'm not talking giving us the entire mission system, but instead a limited purview to write missions specifically to teach new players game mechanics, ALL game mechanics. How to setup an overview, how to setup a POS and best practices, Wormholes and You, etc. There are a few thousand players out there who spend hours to tens of hours a week at helping newbies as part of their corp job. You toss them a tool where they can automate the whole thing so they can actually get back to playing Eve and they'll jump on it.

    Create the silly things on Sisi, flag to send up to CCP, they'll vet it to see if it pops any warning bells, CCP puts the silly thing in an area of sissy specifically for it, other players critique it to see if it's worthy of going live, if it scores high enough on the system, flagged to go to Trinity next patch. Players on trinity live upvote and downvote tutorials that cover the same thing, possibly even feedback on areas they didn't understand if they feel like it. Player who built it gets an Evemail, he can go back to sissy and put more work in on it, or pass the tutorial over to someone else if he doesn't feel like maintaining it.

    Sure, it's an entire production cycle marque feature. But it would outright solve a problem CCP would never ever ever have to worry about again. All of Eve would be explained in game within a year, you'd never have to leave the client to read how something worked ever again.

  5. "Audience" What a fitting word for the direction this game is heading in.

  6. This, in a nutshell.

    There's another point that needs to be raised, which is that even if you restrict the discussion to ship PVP, there are lots of different kinds of PVP. I have a friend who has avowedly avoided EVE PVP and EVE PVPers because of exactly what Malcanis describes. So when I got in some fleet PVP in a WH, and posted the bantery, mutually respectful chatter in Local afterward, my friend's reply was, "oh, well if it's THAT kind of PVP I'd be interested." And it wasn't because we'd won.

    This is not to say that there's right and wrong kinds of PVP. That's absurd. But there are forms that some people will enjoy more than others, and there are forms that people on both the winning and the losing side are more likely to enjoy. It's not enough merely to expose people to "PVP;" it should be possible to give people a taste of different kinds, including some kinds that are better for learning the ropes (I like the dueling mechanic for this reason). Because while straight ganks and gate camps are necessary kinds of EVE PVP, there's a whole lot more to EVE PVP than either.

  7. There's one more aspect of hisec that doesn't seem to get much ink; for some people, even those who hate "carebear" activities, it's their line of retreat, the last refuge for them to recover and get back into the game. There's a difference between being risk-averse and utter-annihilation-averse.

    You're going to get people who do take risks, but if they make a wrong choice, CCP absolutely has to make sure they've got some way to recover, or they're going to bleed out the players they need to retain to keep the game above water.

    If hisec were nerfed into the pavement, I've got to say there's a good chance I might have hung up my subscriptions after getting caught on the painful end of one of the recent sov-null conflicts. The Great Game demands tons of money - which I didn't have - and an unrelenting commitment to endure all the drama - which I exhausted.

    Oh, and by "tons of money", I mean that I was in an alliance that put out a general directive stating, quite literally, that everyone in alliance needed to have at least two billion ISK in their wallet by the end of the following week. This was treated as a reasonable request - from the perspective of people who didn't quite seem to get that for some of their lower-deck grunts, that meant quintupling their ready cash. In a week.

    And when they had to abandon their holdings in the southwest, and ordered everyone to pull up stakes and move everything to the other side of the map ... well, sometimes you've just got to walk away. And if you have to walk away, there's got to be somewhere you can go.

    A couple of years from now, if that somewhere isn't in hisec, it just might be in the cockpit of a Constellation, and I don't think that CCP wants that.

  8. Pretty sure you mean CCP Sisyphus, not CCP Sunset...

  9. There is a way to make the transition from PvE to PvP easier but it would require more resources than CCP wants to put into it. Take the PvE and require the successful completion of combat missions to require PvP fits. Require actual fights with NPC ships that aren't gimped. Every game out there seems to have this idea that the best PvE experience is one powerful player fighting hordes of mindless enemies to certain victory. That is what Eve PvE has become. Make the PvE come to the PvP in terms of experience and then the mission runner isn't playing a game so different from the pirate. Players optimize for what you give them. Mission runner and highseccers in general are doing exactly what they should do which is to build their strengths to the environment they are in. Only CCP can change that environment on the scale needed. Burn JITA, hulkageddon, and other player initiatives can't undo or change that --- A 5 or 10 mission Tutorial series isn't going to either.

  10. Eve is a funny. The shit PVE ("lolredcrosses" - massively.com comment section) is understandable but why is the barrier to entry for PvP so much higher than every other so called PvP game.

  11. The categories of highsec carebear are more complicated than you make out.

    One important category is the the solo rational ISK maximizer.

    Plenty of players have looked for profit outside of highsec and concluded that, when including both the in-game costs involved (mainly, losing ships to gank), and out-of-game costs (like, being chained to your computer to hit dscan every 10 seconds, for an hour), there's just no profit. Now, there are actually some profits out there outside of highsec. But they either involve group operations, or they are niches, basically. Where there is not reward that is proportionate to risk is in the obvious solo money-making methods that the game teaches you about. Mining, missioning, ratting. Also, at least until Retribution, exploration in highsec was very profitable. (They seem to have nerfed this although I can find no official indication of that. Sample size small: might be just a bad run of luck.)

    In my case, it was actually the discovery of a profit-method -- PI -- that does offer far better returns outside of highsec, which lured me out of highsec. I now live part time in wspace, so I can farm PI on better planets and without taxes. PI has the right balance: you can do it in highsec, but not nearly as profitably as you can do it in low/null/w. And the profits are so much more outside of highsec that they will pay for being ganked every so often.

    (Sadly, I wasn't reading EVE blogs last summer when FW was horribly broken profitwise. Didn't know. If I had, I'd have done that.)

    We profit maximizers have chosen highsec for the simple reason that it is where the profit is. We are not there "no matter what". If you change the economic structure, we may choose some other way to make profit.

  12. FW is still broken in terms of payouts for risk incurred. You can still semi-afk run sites in t1 fit frigates, they actually made it even easier to do so. I don't even understand why people fit cloaks and stabs to them. All you need are guns to kill the one rat that spawns and then its completely expendable and more than pays for itself many times over.

  13. I think people need to look at the types of PVP that occur in eve, such as solo roams, small-gang, large fleet, station games, ganking, and wardecs. Then, you have other variations, such as how those types of battles change in high-sec, lowsec, nullsec, or w-space. Now, out of those which are the most fun for both sides of the fight? I would guess solo, small-gang, or large fleet actions all have people who really enjoy the fights, on both sides of an engagement. Station games, ganks, or wardecs, however, tend to be more one-sided in the fun factor. Now, think to yourself, which once are new players or high-sec players usually exposed to? Is it any wonder that many highsec players don't get into pvp as much?

  14. I have played EVE for about six weeks now, and the closest I got to PvP was when I got targeted by a Drake inside a radar site in a lowsec pocket I was trying to clear, so my perspective here is perhaps limited, but I seems to me that there is a division between playstyles related, but different than the PvE-PvP division.

    There is the persistent world accumulation of money and resources game, and then there is the immediate scoreboard-killboard game more reminiscent of FPS or RTS game loops. The former does not necessarily exclude all PvP, just the purely destructive PvP associated with the latter. And then they are annoyed when a roaming PvP gang turns up in search of "good fights", rather than, say, competing for limited resources or something more directly tied to the persistent game. The very different priorities mean that the players with these two playstyles cannot really compete on equal ground, if only due to very different loss tolerance. As far as I can tell, game mechanics do relatively little to make these mesh well, and of course the tutorial introduces only the persistent game.

  15. 1) We now have a Dueling system
    2) CCP already knows how to implement battle-finding (Dust 514)

    So merge the two into an optional line missions that are a mixture of duel, tournament and mission. Limit the ships on both sides to match the agent level and they split a reward payout based on performance.

    This would provide a consensual path for highsec to get involved with PVP.


  16. Thing that always gets me, there are no progression paths for CEO-s. Huge fan of the farms and fields aproach, and ground up sov, but you start doing that with hisec, would be pretty damn cool.

    Imagine a way to have a corporation actually make money. You have a decent amount of startup capital, and reasons that a player corp can make the kind of money that npc corps cannot. perhaps you have to hire mission runners yourself, instead of agents, have agents give out missions to a CEO, who then has to outsource the items. Probably can just run contracts to recieve so many goods etc, but less profit than if doing it with an actual employee.

    Bam. start getting steady streams of tax revenue, modules and salvage from mission runners, who aren't able to run missions unless they are working for a CEO, or contracted out by one.

    Can then hire industry people to turn this salvage into profit. Internal employees get bonuses (perhaps CEO pays fee to be able to utilize certain corporate slots, or perhaps has enough people to make POS viable, the private slot rental would go a long way for that.

    Industry people either sell them back to the company, or market them internally. no broker fees if the corp sells them to members, as an incentive. Each middle man gets his own commission.

    Mission runners or miners, PI, etc. (base level extraction) need to be hired by a corporation to be able to find missions, belts etc. can keep percentage of value from extraction, keeping the 'carebears' happy, and actually being part of the community.

    second level industry, research etc get use of paid facilities and materials, get a percentage of the profit again, bringing them back to company coffers. Better funded corps are able to logistically do this better.

    Station traders, haulers etc basically brings goods to market. Hell, you could almost see distributers being a viable company, selling hauling and selling services for a percentage of profit.

    Finally, all this case is in the corporate wallet. funnding ops, expanding assets, paying payroll etc.

    Now there's a reason to actually wardec people. Guy next door is building thrashers, cutting your profit margin. Go to war, industry starts building fleet doctrine, selling them internally. Bounties and medals set up for killing directing staff, FC's, POS etc.

    I've often been a fan of creating a working stock exchange along with EVE's commodity exchange, but creating corporations that actually run like corporations would be up there as well.

  17. DSJ has a good comment up there: Take the PvE and require the successful completion of combat missions to require PvP fits.

    But I don't think this has to be unduly hard to implement. Here's one idea: when an NPC ship takes damage into structure, it attempts to warp off. (Those which warp successfully should simply vanish once they are off grid.) NPCs unable to warp because of disruption should attempt to move away from players. This change would mean that in order to get any salvage, players must fit warp disruptors. And also in order to complete missions which have mcguffins dropped by NPC ships. These missions should be clearly marked on their briefing.

    Here's another idea. Currently, NPCs have a weak tank and very weak DPS, as if they had only fit one gun or missile launcher. So, take the current NPCs, and double each one in terms of tank/guns. Then halve their numbers. (Double their loot/salvage.) This preserves the existing mission balance, while making the NPCS perform more like PVP fits. Then iterate that, maybe 3 times so that NPCs end up about 6x as strong as now and 1/6 as numerous.

  18. I'm skeptical that changes to the PvE aspects of the new player tutorials are going to fix this problem. I think that ultimately the problem is that training someone to do something as complicated and organic as playing EvE competently is just not something you can do with a pre-canned mission. That's fine, because players have already solved this problem. Hundreds of corps train noobs into competent players all the time. Some, like RvB, Agony, Eve Uni, etc even do it semi-publicly. The problem is that the New Player tutorials never connect noobs to this level of the game and so noobs get stuck in the obvious activities of solo highsec: mining and missions, maybe exploration.

    Partly, I think CCP has been reticent to "bless" player organizations for fear of unbalancing the sandbox, but perhaps they are erring too far. Perhaps the time has come for something like the accreditation system of real educational institutions: Create a class of "new pilot training programs" which player corps could qualify for and get accreditation. In return for whatever qualifications CCP (or the community) sees fit to impose, these corps would get privileged referral from the new player tutorials in the form of "there's lots more to learn, but you need to get it from trained capsuleers, so here's a list of accredited organizations for the training of new pilots and what they specialize in." Accredited corps would need to satisfy certain criteria for the treatment and training of new players, but would get a steady stream of recruits for their efforts.


  19. But Jester, if we don't force a bunch of carebears without guns and those that aren't good at PVP out of hisec then who would James315, his followers shoot in low sec or 0.0????

  20. Jester: "If you haven't yet voted in the CSM8 election, please do so!"

    Don't bother. Any player account which does not cast the full 14 votes will have its unspent votes proxied by Dolan, to gather the amount of votes needed to get CCP's "preferred" CSM members elected. That's how the primary was tweaked, after the mishap with the endorsements.

    Nice, neat and impossible to prove.

  21. Another unpleasant side effect of the current state of high-sec PvP is that it has the perverse effect of discouraging would-be PvPers and encouraging people to be even more solo-carebearish. Consider a corporation that has just been wardec'd by a more skilled corp whose purpose is not to edify or entertain, but to generally grief players and extort the corp for money. The defending corp generally splits into two camps. The first says "Let's fight them!" and the second says "No way I'm fighting those guys". The first group gets repeatedly blown up when they throw their missioning Algos/Thorax/Megathron at gate camping Hictors. The second group discovers that they are no longer safe missioning or mining. Frustrated, the first group either quits the game or drops corp. The second group either drops corp to hide in the relative safety of an NPC corp OR stays in corp and learns how to avoid PvP at all costs (scouting routes, warp stabs in the low slots, watching local, generally being paranoid). In the end, the people most likely to PvP in the future have either been driven out of the game or made to think the barriers to entry are insurmountable. These are, in theory, the sorts of people you would want to be new blood in low and null. The other group, already risk averse, become PvP avoidance experts. The net result of the wardec? Fewer willing PvPers who might down the road become participants in "gudfights" and a somewhat more clever breed of carebear. Not exactly the outcome most high sec PvP advocates hope for.

  22. Seagull is still very busy with CREST api improvements. Realistically, at the pace she's working, it will be another year before she's able to devote any time to anything else.

    CCP did good picking her. She fits right in.

  23. As an high-sec industrialist I am already in a three to one engagement.

    I need to complete with other industrialists resource gathering. Try locating an intact grav site half way into the Eve day cycle. They get fished within the hour of downtime. Locate a moon within reasonable operating distance of a market. and Any R&D BP slot has a wait of at least 40days.

    Complete with market traders more agressive than a stock market broker in Wall Street. or its the one isk bots.

    Run the gauntlet of pirates and mere lol gankers. Who seem to exist in ever increasing numbers. How many wannabees go with miner bothering at their start in this "occupation"?

    I would be curious to see a rival protection racket startup plying the belts. Maybe Test prop up some hopeful with a perchant for lawyer styled Raison d'être.

    Do I really need more competition in this game by trying to shoot someone? No, I think get enough PvP for now.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.