Maybe if you spent some time on the test server before the expansion is released you could have given them this feedback.

Look at the UI, CCP really listens right?

As CCP said, ACTIONS not words... unsub is the only way to get things changed.

What's the point in giving feedback when it's simply ignored. The spacebook forum and now the new inventory system are good examples.

Read the latest dev blog. They are already acting on some of the feedback and there will be a ton more in the future. Instead of whining how about good suggestions?

YEah I thought mercs could put up a contract in the contract system , to adverse themseleves and name the price for thier protection.

Is there any way at all to see the top merc corps? And the prices they charge?

If only there was some kind of centralized location, some kind of..."merc contracts" channel that was available for people to find established, reputable mercenary groups that won't rip you off. A method of contacting representatives from these groups, via some kind of electronic correspondence system or real-time interpersonal text-based communication interface, would also be a welcome addition to the game.



The addition of a hard-coded system for paying for mercenaries/initiating ally wars has already done enough damage to player freedom. Why do we need even more roadblocks in place that prevent people from ripping each other off? And this is coming from someone who does honest work, too.

Nah, that's a bit different. Corp finder doesn't force people into honesty through hard-coded game mechanics. The new mercenary thing does.

Now, a "mercenary group" can't scam someone out of a fee and then not provide service, and a "client" isn't able to demand services up-front and then renege on the payment. I find this detrimental to Sandbox(tm). Well, they still can, but only if they bypass the new system entirely. Why would anyone do such a thing, though?

People don't wanna make good suggestions. They just wanna play. And they pay for it, EVE is not another-FTP-mmo-game.
So... if CCP wants a good suggestions, they should PAY for that kind of feedback. Players aren't testers, you know.

Read the latest dev blog. They are already acting on some of the feedback and there will be a ton more in the future. Instead of whining how about good suggestions?

Maybe if you spent some time on the test server before the expansion is released you could have given them this feedback.

Mercs in most cases are a waste of time.

The cost of fighting a war is beyond the average player or corporations means. People have to camp in this game to get a kill versus anyone halfway competent.

That means that you aren't paying for results but the manpower hours involved in getting a kill. This obviously goes up with the size of the merc corporation you hire and even more based on the threat of loss the target brings to the merc.

To the majority of corporations the idea of spending 1 billion a week to arguably make one iota of difference isn't particularly compelling. The merc cannot prevent the target from hunting the employer. They can't even guarentee a kill.

However under the same light no one is going to war without an upfront payment and results based pay can lead to a merc camping 40+ hours per week and walking away with nothing.

Until they get rid of local mercs will be at best a paramilitary death squad available to only the richest alliances and players, arguably cost ineffective and likely if paid to increase the net loss the employer endures as opposed to them just logging out of EVE until the attacker retracts the war.

The ally button is a poor attempt at helping out bad ceos and their unorganized corporations. Thats pretty much it.

Now, imagine if you could create a contract that pays out ISK for performance.

Disappointed? How about... shocked at how pointless the whole thing is made by the abortion that is the new ally system.

Now, imagine if you could create a contract that pays out ISK for performance.

- You could make it a private contract, or even a public one to be accepted by any corp/alliance.
- You could optionally limit it to a specific set of regions / constellations / systems.
- You could optionally limit it to killing a particular corp/alliance or set of corps/alliances.
- You escrow a max-payout (total ISK to be paid out) upon creation of the contract.
- You specify a time limit of 1-14 days.
- Contract is completed when the ISK runs out.

Payouts would be done based on which corp/alliance gets the killing blow. In the case where a KM qualifies under multiple contracts, the oldest one takes precedence. Payouts for a particular kill would be split among members who are on-grid, just like rat bounties (including the applicable corp taxes).

Payouts could be specified as percentage of kill mail value (0% up to 999%) up to a maximum ISK value per kill of a particular ship class (frigate, dessy, cruiser, BC, BS, industrial, cap industrial, capitals, s-caps, titans, POS towers, etc). Those percentages / max payouts would need to be individually set for each ship class (maybe you only want to reward the killing of POS towers in a particular system).

Can anyone tell me if David ried is the new marketing director from swtor and if he was in marketing over there too? If memory serves me correctly CCP hired him around fanfest.

Most recently, Reid helped launch Rift, the fantasy MMO from Trion Worlds. He managed a team of 50 people and helped get Rift to more than 1 million paid activations in just a few months. He orchestrated the Rift ad campaign, which used the tagline GÇ£WeGÇÖre not in Azeroth Anymore,GÇ¥ a reference to the chief rival World of Warcraft.

Before joining Trion as senior vice president of marketing, Reid was president of publishing at NCsoft West. He was also vice president of marketing for game portal GameTap and director of the Xbox global platform marketing for Microsoft.