So, rorq's get nerfed as they're an isk facet and now fighters. This will reduce the amount of isk ingame and also push prices of things up making plex suddenly an attractive option. I get why CCP are doing it, they want more money, but it'll push people away thus leading to them having less money.

The changes seem rather drastic so I guess we'll see another rebalance when they're run out of things to nerf.

I suspect, given a choice, CCP would leave us with 1 ship so it's a level playing field and they'd probably still have to rebalance that!

It seems that a lot of player forgot how eve was 10 years ago...it's now really way too easy to buyt a capital ship/super cap....you can make 100/200/400m isk/h now where you had 90m with a carrier ratting in null years ago....but well, now it seems that people want to have easy farming....contrary to the rorqual....I think it's a good nerf. Make Capital ships CAPITAL again.

Of course it does....why do you think I would forget this ? I hate the plex price which encourage to buy some to get isk, I hate skill extractors and injectors and I HATE the capital ship becoming standard ships.

those usually incorporate some kinda twirl too

I mentioned 2 earlier and IMO it's probably the easiest and most "balanced" way to fix this "problem". If you implement #2 then #1 is moot anyway. If you want to implement #2 you will probably have to do #3 anyway, so we ALL win.

Please CCP, listen to us here. Some people CANNOT afford to play this game in a paid subscription/RL money way. If you keep removing viable options for us to play by working for it, then you are going to see a reduction in the Omega clone subscriptions. I'm not saying "I quit" but I will be looking at the number of Omega subs I have. I'm not a high volume player like some people are, and I am not the richest guy in the game, but in my tenure here, I have been able to make good business decisions, and save enough to not HAVE to pay for my subs. But I would rather save that isk for a rainy day, or invest in side projects, than blow it all on however many subs I would need.

At the end of the day (gawd I hate that line) your heavy handed band aid solutions are not garnering you any good will here. Please step back for a moment and re-evaluate your course of action here. Eve isn't here because of you, CCP. It is here because we love this game, and we love the community we have built around it (despite Gons best efforts to the contrary--JK) and it is here because we continue to open our wallets every month, 6 months, 12 months etc and continue to pay your salaries, buy new equipment and bring tourism to Iceland every year. CCP doesn't pay for Fanfest. WE DO.

CCP you would do well to remember that.

Imho you're basing a lot of bad product management decisions of quantitative metrics. If you bothered to look at this more holistically you'd likely rationalise the events of income increases to be more focused on a number of contributing events - specifically microtransaction(s).

The Paradox of Thrift comes to mind here where you apparently aren't really factoring in player behaviours (qualitative). Some alliances and coalitions are right now actually coming out from under a "hoarding" behaviour, whereby they have been for the better part of month instructing members to "Krabbing" in order to get ready for larger PVP content next month.

Further to this, you have issues around CCP's introduction to microtransaction behaviour such as PLEX. This, in turn, has created a serious impact on the Eve economy on all product line(s). Moreover to the point the skill injector changes, in turn, has pushed pricing out further.

So now when you look at the said graph you've got a number of contributing variables that result in players likely more focused on PVE has given that's a likely easier route to liquidity in ISK which in turn feeds the aforementioned points (cause and effect).

Subtle effects introduced by CCP also IMHO hint strongly that you folks are opting towards removing the "Plex to Play" instead of heading towards "Pay to play". Things like selling Plex in a bundle of 240 via player purchases but then selling content such as skins for 250. You're effectively goading your player base to over buy in order to purchase, so either a player pays for the 500 ISK bundle or they pay 240 and 100 resulting in a 90 remainder. Its a form of economic affordance that's obviously similar to retail channels who put in place "minimum spend" targets on consumers.

The point I'm making is it's obvious you're attempting to draw further income from your player base in order to offset whatever investments you may be having as a company in either Eve Online or other product lines you're making.

Here's the reality though, you're not growing your market share at the moment and with these ongoing changes in passive income you're imposing a negative effect on the existing market share you have (therefore likely replenishing the market is less inclined).

Rorq mining is volatile at the moment due to anxiety about its changes (see 'Excavator' Mining Drone pricing indicative of its anxiety). Given your max reality for a Rorqual, a miner is approx 150m ISK per hour you in turn as a player may seek an alternative stream - in this case Super Ratting. De-invest in the Mining and re-invest back into PVE, but your buy-in is around 24billion+ for said super. This, in turn, means you'd need to grind for a month or maybe two in order to pay that investment back before you actually generate positive ISK.

Factor in now the risk(s) associated with super rating which is quite high, you've now got to then focus in around how larger corporation/alliances/coalitions protect their members within systems. In doing this they, in turn, localise their deployment strategies to ensure players centre around Keepstar(s) for responsive fleet strategies.

So what you graph don't show is Keepstar to System ratio(s) and where Super Ratting vs Deaths, as when you centre around these qualitative points you begin to have a better understanding of actual player behaviour(s) and why "super nerf" is required.

You haven't argued this point, instead, you've taken a bad sample of data and said something like "My dog barks loudly, therefore Cars need to be nerfed"... how do these two points relate? and suppressing the virtual economy right now is simply an incentive to de-invest play-time in the game.

Three months from now lets look at player login(s) per hour and compare results, I'll predict you'll see a reduction based on this ongoing behaviour to sweep the ISK creation.

Effectively you're suffering from the same spiral Ultima Online suffered when it introduced the Black Dye Tub - You've created a butterfly effect and you're imho not self-ware yet.

But you'll do what you want anyway, and thankfully we have CSM's there to protect us from behaviours that aren't player favoured -.....right?

Advocates...where are they again?