they wont show you cause it looks THAT bad, and with these changes its going to be even worse.

Pretty much this. Eve is a cesspool of the worst of humanity. I think this is why I have found it hard to log in over the last few years and have just been playing skillqueue online.

1) Not a problem at all - I wonder what ECM and sensor dampeners are for. Best thing about your scenario, while they have each other locked, they can't lock the fleet that is using EWAR and killing them. My 1st targets in that situation, any command ship followed by logi.

I don't see how having 12 ships locked at once would help you.. You can only engage the primary (1st one locked or selected target) all other locks don't count until the 1st one is dead or the lock broken in some other way. Then you select your next target, in a large fleet pre-locking 12 targets would in many situations hurt, not help you .

Wouldn't know if feedback has been taken on board or not, nothing has been said.

Certain groups may be privy to what feedback has or hasn't achieved but i'm not in one of those groups and only have 2 month old info to base my thoughts and feeling about the coming change on.

Except that isn't the thread that was originally linked.
It originally linked to the thread for the proposed new icons.

LOL, if you read my reply.. I DID respond to the link you posted, it starts out - As for the new icons.
Maybe is was a misdirected URL but that is the thread the link took me to. I would not have commented on the icons otherwise, I had not at the time seen the thread about them.

Not to mention that any small group trying to set up a foothold will be forced to do it in the useless space left outside of the big groups' territory.

Just one funny fact.

The price and traded amount of white glaze and Caldari fuel blocks in Jita are going down, and have been for months.

Less demand for ore + less demand for fuel = less towers consuming it + less industry?

And contrary to your assertion I did learn my lesson. As far as I can tell I can be as big of a meanie as I want, just as long as I conform to proper language etiquette. I can **** you up the ass as much as I want, just as long as I refer to it as "having some fun". Let's have some fun! Don't be rude! We're just having fun! Don't you wanna have fun?

There is no lesson to be learned when people **** with your freedom of speech.

CCP haves some news for you.

Professionals: 30%
Entrepreneurs: 25%
Agressors: 8%
Social: 12%
Traditional: 25%

People who do little to no PvP: 25% Entrepreneurs + 25% Traditional + 12% Social = 62%

Yes, a "theoretical and imaginary" majority of just 62% of the actual players (not ACCOUNTS, not CHARACTERS, but PEOPLE).

So lets see, oh yeah, pretty much none to useless consequences.

Sorry but they don't. Gankers in particular manipulate valid game mechanics to get kills and due to other ineffective mechanics, they get free reign.

I'd like to hear your perception of "don't look after their stuff".

37K online - For an hour or so - Once a week.

According to new data, Null NPC space is very active for null areas. Must be something to it.

OMG.. im amazed.. Sony just showed Eve Valkerie as the Morpheus presentation is beginning

CCP you too silent bro..

Surely you can see the irony in the null sec groups complaining that FozzieSov caters to the griefer and punishes the established when all we ever hear on these forums is how much high-sec needs to be griefed more and ccp made it too hard for griefers.

How about those of us who think people should play the game however they see fit within the rules and parameters of the server... you know, Sandbox style.

I make fun of hypocritical nullbears ...

That is because CCP has been using our subscription money to fund their failed projects. Next on the list is the expansion of DUST (failed) and Valkyrie (will fail)

Perhaps if they didn't treat us like their personal crowd-sourcing finance group they would pay more attention to what is happening in the only viable game they own.

Maybe a translation problem in play here but what he wrote says to me - If CCP invested more time and money on Eve (their money making game) and didn't squander Eve time and resources (including money) on little side projects - Eve would be much better.

Really so those of us who have been around for years should just leave - Because your happy with a few changes that a far greater number dislike.

Dirk MacGirk makes some interesting points about Trollsov:

https://www.themittani.com/features/7-days-and-counting-stop-clock

Priceless bit:



Sounds like fun, yes.

I think that you're missing the point.

It doesn't takes Sov to attack Sov holders until their gameplay becomes "the vulnerabilty window job".

Monday -defend
Thursday -defend
Wednesday -defend
Tuesday -defend again
Friday -huh, not defend
Saturday -whack a mole day
Sunday -defend

Rinse and repeat until you're having fun.

Specially if (when) the guys attacking you don't hold a Sov of their own and there's no way you can turn the tables on them. Ah, of course: the other 2,500 members of your Alliance can share the burden and defend your Sov while you, huh, PLAY the game for a change. But othwerwise, if you're a new guy and just hold one system (with Capital System bonuses, woo-hoo!!) then only takes a little bunch to make your game all about defending that Sov you're not using because you're too busy defending it.

"!=" means "equals not", "is not" in layman's terms.

A specific example? OK, brace yourself for a ride.

The first step is to contact a interactable NPC (I-NPC). They play the role of corrupt officials of the empires. Their abblities depend on their position and can be used after completing a successful task.

So the first thing a I-NPC will ask, is to perform a series of missions for him. Those would be regular missions, which would improve the agent quality to a basical level in which they would be "loaded" and ready to discharge a effect on a player.

In order to do that, a specific mission willl be set up, but that will no be a regular mission. That mission will affect another i-NPC owned by other player.

Missions affecting i-NPCs will be set up authomatically. They will be randomized by consuming points from a pool (similar to how AT works) and once set up the mission will be released publicly to a specific kind of agents. Any player will be able to access the mission, but he will only be informed of the reward and potential difficulty of the mission, not the parties involved, so it will be effectively imposible to farm your own missions. Those missions will be difficult and there will be a potential to miss them (for an instance, using timed triggers).

So here you are. You have an agent willing to affect a player for you, if the mission required is succesfully performed by some anonymous player.

Let's say that the mission succeeds. Then the agent is "loaded" and can be "discharged".

In order to discharge the agent, the target player must meet one or more of several requisites:

- have a negative security status (proportional to the effect, with the most powerful effects usable only on -10.0 chars)
- you have a kill right on him (your own, or bought from another player)
- he destroyed one of your I-NPCs
- he wardecced you
- he earned a criminal flag from messing with you stuff (this should work only for low level effects)
- in short, either he's a being agressing lots of players, or has agressed you specifically. Effects would not be usable on neutral players, at least initially

As for the effects, will say one I already mentioned: upon undocking, he will be "interrogated" (hold still and unable to move or use his modules) for 10 minutes. That will happen randomly and only once; say 10% chance per undock (different quality I-nPCs would have different chance per undock). For an extra cost (higher level I-NPCs, or more difficult missions, or a combo of successful missions) the target could earn a criminal flag for the duration of his "interrogation", becoming a legit target even if he wasn't.

Of course, the "interrogation" event may happen in a lonely system so nobody can shoot the guy... Tough chance.

But wait: As a player planning to undertake a criminal career, you need a lawyer! A friendly I-NPC who, in the event of being loaded, can discharge and negate the effect of another I-NPC effect. Say, a "release order" usable in the event of a "interrogation order".

Then, the original player may look for an agent willing to murder the lawyer and thus deprive the offender from defense until he finds another one... and so and so.

It would be more complicated and costly than just go and scramble the guy as he undocks and shoot his -10.0 face yourself, but also would be riskier as he can't tell when he's gonna be interrogated. And if he wants to avoid that hassle, he must play your way and do some PvE to keep his lawyer(s) loaded and ready to discharge.

The details should be tested on Unity and fine tuned so the workload and risk/reward was sensible. Also the whole randon mission generator probably could be used for ordinary agent missions and not just the I-NPCs missions. On furher iterations, some I-NPCs could be "named" ones, NPC from the lore, extremely dificult and costly to load but with the potential to discharge effects on corporations and alliances, or do really nasty things to individuals (say, tampering with skillpoints upon clone resurrection).

The whole point is, a player willing to put the effort and planning needed to control the appropiate I-NPCs should be rewarded with the abbility to PvP in that way, balanced by the fact that PvPrs could also PvE to defend themselves from that "PvE PvP".

Last but not least, I-NPCs would be a highsec only feature.

That would not:

- add new PvE content
- difficult minmaxing of new PvE content (random missions would be tied to data unknown to the player; FAI, NPCs could react to known fits of the player taking the mission... or not)
- allow player generated PvE content (there would no mission without a player tryign to load a I-NPC, and the mission would be randomzied considering the player generating it, the player targetted and the player undertaking the mission... that's why thorugh testing would be necessary, but that's built in in every procedural/random game system)