What is your problem with someone suggesting something other than what you have in your head at the moment? Is this a discussion board or an inquisition chamber for those who date to speak their mind?

You are free to speak your mind... but we are as well. Your idea at it's core threatens what we love about EVE most...

- that no one is safe... ever.

- it's never ending conflict and ruthlessness (this "encourages" people to band together for protection and strength... which in turn creates bonds and friendships or conflicts and enemies).

- it's multi-faceted nature (i.e. if I can't attack my enemy militarily then I will go after his industrial base... or put a spy in his/her ranks... or bribe someone in a leadership position).

- that everything is interconnected (ex1. the guy mining all by himself in high-sec? He is indirectly affecting the war out in null-sec. ex2. Those gankers killing miners and missing runners? They reduce the supply of minerals and ISK going into the economy... making the ore I mine and the ISK appreciate in value).


You can say "it will only exist alongside EVE... nothing will change" til you are blue in the face... but the truth is it will. You simply can't have two diametrically opposed systems interact in any fashion and live in harmony. PvP and "non-PvP" systems conflict at a fundamental level and require very different things to function in any stable way.

it's like going into a game of Battlefield or Call of Duty and asking if different mechanics can be made that only allows you to drive vehicles and capture flags without being shot at or blown up. You are essentially asking for different game.

Did I somehow offend you or your game? Are you scared I'm going to take away your security blanket? Fear no more, only a few hours left until I am gone.

You do know based on demographics, OP is likely from the USA, and therefore 60% likely to be suffering from a compound case of illiteracy and pure apathy, right?

No offense to americans that actually learned to read growing up, but Ive dealt with too many in my time that struggle to read things as simple as Romeo and Juliet when they are over 20 years old (is it true they actually make "translated" versions of this book in EVE for what they consider "english"? i seem to remember seeing one a friend had that had some form of pseudo "gangster" speech typed in every margin translating the words from the book)

For the last time now: game X is perfect but it will not last, at least not unless it evolves. I love my left arm but if it catches gangrene I will cut it off. The end.

For the last time now: game X is perfect but it will not last, at least not unless it evolves. I love my left arm but if it catches gangrene I will cut it off.

... Things are only impossible until they are not? Sounds perfectly adequate in this thread :)

good night

EVE won't last either if your idea was implemented. The idea itself is what ruins these games.

And if your arm catches gangrene, you don't have to cut it off anymore. You see, if you live in a remotely developed country, you can go to the hospital and get that looked at long before amputation is required. Even by the time of the American Civil War they knew you didn't have to always cut the arm off like they used to.

And what game are you talking about? EVE has been an evolving game for 10 years. It is also an MMO that (if you look at the data) has had one of the overall healthiest subscriber increase over the last 10 years.

Oooh that was such a great reply wasn't it? So smart you must be proud of yourself. After all this is what people on this board are so great at - take a few words out of general contest and catch a bit of spotlight by making a "smart" comment.

"The idea itself is what ruins these games" - which idea and what games? Wait, you must be American!

You so funny

Alright, so basically NO to the second shard. No to Americans and No to any software development that would require CCP to abandon 10 year-old military hardware and Python plagued software. Also No to limb amputation... and to being behind whatever it is that happens to be ahead.


Fine. Anything else?

Seriously, if you are as into the hardcore PVP aspects of this game I shouldn't have to put this here, but it seems you need a refresher.

Alright, so basically NO to the second shard. No to Americans and No to any software development that would require CCP to abandon 10 year-old military hardware and Python plagued software. Also No to limb amputation... and to being behind whatever it is that happens to be ahead.


Fine. Anything else?

You misunderstand. We would love for CCP to go state of the art on all their servers.... as long as we didn't have to pay our next year's salary for it. Upgrading hardware/software is great. But your concept of Farmworld: Eve style won't pay for that. And you absolutely cannot have a farm world of Eve be playable with the main world. This would mess up the economy in Eve irreparably.

We also want CCP to continue to develop Eve. But we don't play Eve to play mining barges and missions online. Eve is so great cause it's so open. Your new shard concept places Eve in a cage, then shackles, then locks it shut, then puts another chain around it for good measure. This isn't way Eve is. We want to get to the point of Player built star gates, Player vs Empire, and a node that can handle 4k vs 4k battles....as well as every other conflict from corporate espionage, sabotage, 1v1, ganking, small, mid, large, epic fleet size combat, market pvp, and so forth. This is how Eve can continue to improve.


Not with a farm shard.

As far as limb amputation... I would advise against it... but we can't tell you what to do with your arm, gangrenous or not.

Because you can't have 2 worlds function under entirely different rules and co-exist. It doesn't work. It would be like TQ being able to cross market with the Chinese Server. They would inherently break one, the other, or both.


You ask why the farmworld reference? Because an Eve online so shackled by your idea is Farmworld. The Economy in Eve functions because of conflict. Minus conflict, there is a finite market for everything. Conflict drives demand, which uses supply, which creates new demand. Take out the demand for new ships, modules, fuel, or make the supply massively outweigh the demand, you ruin the TQ Economy. Do we even need to go into the droves of mining Bot and ISBoxer fleets running around?

You have had plenty of time to sarcastically reply to every post on this thread, go back and proofread/edit your posts 2 minutes after posting, so don't come at me with 'wish I had time to discuss.'

The 'Wolves' will survive either way. You want us to only have to pay 10mil for a gank talos? Oh He** yes. Let's see the 'Oh my freighter was ganked!' tears from that. The Sheep rely on conflict as much as the wolves. The conflict keeps their product moving, and keeps the wolves biting at each other as much as the sheep. There is no survival in Eve with out the conflict driver. And without the conflict driver, there is no Eve.

Arguably the best reply so far. I would love to discuss but my time is limited. May I just ask why the Farmworld reference? All I am proposing is for segregation of the wolves and the sheep.

It would no longer be a single, unsharded universe.
Also, your premise #4 is highly suspect. There's nothing wrong with people not liking the game.

If you want to appeal to a bigger audience, the better suggestion would be to make a game that caters to that audience, not to try to squeeze them into a game they don't like by compromising what people do like about it. So your entire problem has already been solved. It's called GÇ£Wold of DarknessGÇ¥.

With any luck, WoD will be just as nasty of a place as New Eden. That's the main reason I'm looking forward to it. Better that than another WoW Clone.

While there is an understandable strong reaction against the OP's suggestion, the points raised should not be instantly dismissed as worthless, they are not.

HS is a different place from a year ago, it is perceived as significantly more aggressive now. Whether this is true or not is a matter for individual players to decide.

The idea of a super safe zone is in my opinion over the top, but there certainly is room for + 1.1 and 1.2 for newer players to retire to to lick their wounds and rebuild.

*ahem*

Trammel Server.


Fortunately... perception is not reality. If anything... high-sec has become MUCH safer than it ever has been in its history.


Which is already the case. Newbies in the rookie zones are already "off-limits" to veterans and this policy is enforced with a temp ban.

The problems start occurring when veterans take advantage of this by creating "new accounts" to conduct or safeguard their high-value business in said zones.