EVE Online is not a PVP game

Sophia 'Alizabeth' S 2019-09-07

Header art by Redline XIII

EVE Online is not a PVP game. It never has been. It’s been a simulation with PVP in it, but it has never been a PVP game.

The other day I played a few matches in World of Warships. That is a PVP game. If a player wants to progress in the game, they need to queue up for a match and go shoot other players. And though there were some PVE elements added later, PVP still remains the focus. Indeed, it is 100% possible to progress through the game only PVPing. Want to sail a Hindenburg around, Kemosabe? I hope you like shooting other players.

In EVE, there are generally two ways for a character (that’s toonie to you pubbies) to advance. The first is skill points. This normally happens automatically and takes absolutely no effort on the part of the player. The second way to advance a character is to make ISK. This takes effort on the player’s part. Usually. PLEX allows someone to use their credit card.

PVP is an ISK Losing Activity

Let’s imagine that there are two players who have 100 identically fitted frigates each. Let’s further assume that they will maintain a 50-50 win rating. Each frigate is worth 50 million ISK and prices will never change. Those of you who know the physics joke about perfectly-spherical chickens in a vacuum might recognize our scenario will never happen in a dynamic system, but it’s the only way we can really look at this problem.

After 100 engagements, Pilot A has flown away victorious with loot and salvage 50 times. Pilot B has done the same. Because of drop rates, insurance never paying out full value, salvage never equaling the cost of the ship, neither pilot has made ISK. In this closed system, eventually one pilot will have lost everything, and one pilot will have lost nearly everything.

Of course this will never happen in EVE. One player will likely be better and the win rate will change the ISK in her favour. Market forces may come into play with salvage or loot drops. However, the fact remains that in a closed system, PVP is not self-sustainable. Ultimately, the entire game is a closed system.

PVP is Not Rewarded, With One or Two Exceptions

In World of Warships, when a player does damage, destroys enemies, or myriad other things that help achieve victory, the game directly rewards the player with experience points and money, the two things that a player needs to advance. With experience points and money, a player can buy better modules and better ships. Better modules and better ships are the way to advance in World of Warships.

In EVE Online, PVP does not reward the pilot. A victorious pilot might be able to loot and salvage, depending on the circumstances. A defeated pilot gets an insurance payout that does not come close to covering the loss of the ship.

The sole current exception is Faction Warfare. In all of EVE Online, Faction Warfare is the only aspect of EVE that could be considered PVP focused. In Faction Warfare, killing other players in the opposite faction provides a tangible reward within the game, in the form of Loyalty Points. And though Loyalty Points are an ISK sink (meaning that using the Loyalty Points store takes ISK out of the game) it is a reward. However, because Loyalty Points are an ISK sink, Faction Warfare is also not self-sustaining.

The other aspect of EVE that was PVP focused was the Alliance Tournament, or other PVP tournaments. At the end, the victorious teams were rewarded with unique ships that directly added value to their accounts. However, the Alliance Tournament was cancelled this year and no one has any idea if it is coming back. Other tournaments, like the Amarr Trials, happen on an as-needed, or as-wanted basis.

These two are the only exceptions to EVE not being a PVP game. And, again, neither of them are self-sustaining in a closed system.

EVE is a PVE Game

If one wants to make ISK in EVE, aside from using one’s credit card to buy PLEX to sell on the market, a player has to PVE. There are myriad ways to PVE in EVE: high and low sec missioning, abyssal diving, and ratting. Mining and industry also count because they create ISK through insurance payouts. Though that does require destruction. The PVP focused Faction Warfare even has its own missions for Faction Warfare pilots. All of these activities are required for EVE to function as a game. Without the injection of ISK into the economy, the economy dies. Without miners and industrialists to produce ships, the game dies.

PVE is directly rewarding to a player. When a player completes a mission, they get an ISK reward. When a player kills a rat, they get an ISK reward. When a player cycles a mining laser on an asteroid, they get ore in their cargohold. Recently, when CCP did their Season of Skills, killing a rat, or 5 or 10, netted the player skill points.

PVE is also a critical factor in Sovereign Null as well. Without PVE activity of some kind, the Activity Defense Multiplier does not go up. Without the ADM, Sov Null is more vulnerable to attack. So, if an alliance wants to be more secure, the pilots in that alliance, or at the very least the alliance’s system, must PVE. There is no other way.

PVE is Not Bad

So, there we have it. PVE is mandatory for EVE’s economy and game. To change it at this point would require a near-total redevelopment of the game and game systems. Without ISK from PVE being injected into the economy, the economy dies. Without minerals being mined, the economy dies.

Recently, Imperium Logistics Director Tuzy posted the stats on the Peak Concurrent User numbers since the blackout. The numbers are all the way bad. The PCU of September 1 is down almost 6 thousand accounts since the start of the Blackout. Anyone intelligent knows this is a bad thing. The dumb, stupid, idiotic, and moronic player thinks that the loss of 6 thousand accounts is good, because it’s either bots, or carebears. While it might take a while for the financial results to hit because of subscription time, this represents a loss of around $100 thousand a month, or $1.2 million a year. In no earnings report does that look good.

“As you can see on line 15, our revenue is down 1.2 million dollars this year. However, we feel that several factors offset this. The first is that Reddit is really, really happy with us. The second is that we feel the overall health of the game is better because it’s more of the hard-core PVPers left in the game,” said no one ever.

The other side effect is that prey has decreased.

Predators and Prey

Recently, I took a trip to the zoo to see the big cats that the Madison zoo has. Big cats are awesome. Around the lion exhibit there was the usual bit about the animals and how they lived in the wild. One thing really stood out to me. On average, it takes about 16 hunting trips for a lioness to make a successful hunt. EVE players bitch if they go one roam without seeing anyone.

For every predator, there needs to be a much greater number of prey. For every lion on the savanna, there needs to be hundreds more of suitable prey animals. For every pilot roaming around in a bomber trying to find a ratter to explode, there needs to be dozens or hundreds of targets. Most of them, sometimes all of them will get away.

All PVE activity needs to have greater rewards than risk. If a player cannot make more ISK, and by a large margin, than they lose PVEing, they will not do it. It does not matter how the losses happen, be it to rats or other players. In the wild, an over abundance of predators reduces the prey population. In turn, less prey means the predators die out. They have to balance. If those 6 thousand accounts less on the PCU were just carebears, then sooner or later there will have to be balance.

The Zimbabwe Syndrome

There is one downside to unchecked PVE: hyperinflation. Without ISK sinks (which oddly enough is not destruction), unchecked PVE will result in the kind of inflation seen in Zimbabwe or the Weinmar Republic. No one wants to pay trillions of ISK for a Tech II module. Predators attacking ratters in null sec does help the economy. Even the presence of a predator helps the economy when the ratters dock up. A docked ship generates no ISK.

There are a few problems, though. Firstly, a less-skilled pilot flying a Myrmidon in null generates less ISK and is more vulnerable than a supercarrier pilot doing the same thing in the same system. A lone lioness will make a rabbit scurry for shelter. However, the hippopotamus does not give one single fuck. However, the issue here is not one of PVE, or the design of null sec, but one of ship balance. Away from keyboard Vexor Navy Issues were never the problem for inflation that an at-the-keys supercarrier was.

Predators that do not like PVE hate their prey. See, the predators have to PVE to keep funding their PVP, but they don’t like it. So, the more effective the prey, the more total prey, the more ISK there is in the system. That means a predator has to do more of what they do like to keep funding the same activities.

(Botting is a completely separate issue that doesn’t belong in this article. Botting is all bad.)

Mining, on the other hand, is a complicated bit. Mining rocks does not generate ISK. Refining rocks costs ISK. Turning the refined minerals into useful things costs ISK. Selling goods on the market costs ISK. Only when a ship is destroyed does ISK get generated. This does not apply to modules. It has been a long time since CCP changed insurance to reflect the mineral cost. See, way back in the day, there were NPC sell orders for minerals on the market, because players didn’t mine enough to run the industrial machine needed to power EVE. Insurance payouts were based on those NPC sell order costs. Once players started mining more, the cost to manufacture and sell certain ships meant that one could buy those ships, insure them, and then self destruct them and make ISK. CCP fixed that one real fast. Insurance payouts are based on the mineral price indices. If every mineral cost .01 ISK, the insurance payout would be lowered to reflect that.

In that way, mining is probably the best PVE activity. More abundant minerals mean less expensive minerals. That means less expensive ships, which decreases the cost of PVP. There are a lot of people that decry the person multiboxing Rorquals, but that is not bad for the game. It’s not even bad for PVP.

And before anyone points out that there are a tonne of supercapitals now because of Rorquals, that is a separate issue! Again, the issue one of ship balancing and manufacturing.

We PVP So We Can PVE

As much as I like The Mittani, when he said recently that Goonswarm PVEs so they can afford PVP and the losses they cause, I think he got it backwards. PVP might be what many (most?) EVE players want to do. I know I enjoy it. However, PVP is not what we have to do. We, in the general sense of the player base, must PVE. So, when someone comes into our space to try and kill our PVE ships, we have to fight back. Without our PVE engine, the economy would crash and burn.

There are a lot of problems with EVE right now, specifically sov null sec (which is all I know and care about). This article doesn’t seek to address them, but rather rebut some of the sheer stupidity that is being said in all sorts of places about what kind of game is EVE Online.

Let your voice be heard! Submit your own article to Imperium News here!

Would you like to join the Imperium News staff? Find out how!

Comments

  • Arrendis

    This article seems disturbingly short for one of Ali’s.

    September 7, 2019 at 7:15 am
    • Caleb Ayrania Arrendis

      Arrendis first law. This text is too damn short
      Arrendis second law. People are idiots
      Arrendis Theorem law one and law two might be related.

      September 7, 2019 at 11:44 am
      • Menaiya Caleb Ayrania

        Arrendis Law seems related to Murphy’s
        Second cousin’s perhaps?

        September 7, 2019 at 3:44 pm
    • You say this knowing that I’ve given you 7 thousand words in the past 4 days on a variety of topics. You say this still not having read the latest pages. Sweet Arrendis, if you want more words, I will give you more words.

      September 7, 2019 at 12:05 pm
      • Rhivre Alizabeth

        Oh dear….what has Arrendis unleashed!

        September 7, 2019 at 1:21 pm
      • Arrendis Alizabeth

        You only think I haven’t read the latest pages. Rite Moar.

        September 7, 2019 at 1:38 pm
      • Havish Montak Alizabeth

        We want more!!!! We want more!!!!! We want more!!!! We want more!!!!! We want more!!!!

        September 8, 2019 at 8:10 am
    • zeenkz Arrendis

      Despite its comparative brevity, the article reveals more of the nature of Eve Online than anyone at CCP demonstrated lately. Is it possible they’ve injected chaos into the game out of fear of what WOW Classic was going to do to their PCU metrics.

      September 10, 2019 at 2:31 pm
      • Arrendis zeenkz

        It’s more likely that they’ve injected ‘chaos’ (which is nothing of the sort, it’s just stratification) because Hilmar’s genuinely afraid that as the October ‘1 year evaluation’ period looms, PA’s might be looking to shake up the CCP leadership team and wants to assert his own value.

        September 10, 2019 at 4:17 pm
  • Caleb Ayrania

    The problem with this article is that its “Not even wrong” its just fundamentally pointing at what went wrong in the simulator. EVE is not a PVP game, this is true, but only because most PVP games make it “easy” to progress by PVP alone. In EVE the simulation is supposed to be a PVE/Creation simulator that gives rise to incentivised PVP, thus becoming an ECOSYSTEM. We used to have more of that before CCP and the playerbase started down the path of “A PVP game”.

    The problem is exactly the “feralized cows” and “wolves in sheep clothing” you refer to. The PVP wolves started running out of sheep to “scale and sustain their habit” and screaming at CCP to fix the game they got catered to. All the QoL changes and “fixes” over the last 8+ years have completely removed the balanced dependency between wolves and sheep.

    The tragedy is that the value of PVE and the Value of PVP is supposed to be blananced and find an equilibrium. When you open all the faucets and you remove the differentiation between wolves and sheep, you end up flattening the game and destroying the emergent interdependency. The short ELI5 is that when a miner mines in a predator risk environment the value of the resources will be high and thus the value of protection (Sheep dogs) will go up. That is why sheep either needs to flock together and tank mortality rate by “over unity production” or hire said sheep dogs. If resource gathering is safe the cost and value of protection goes down and there is no reason to pay the proper value for protection.

    The other side is that in a non protection scenario the loss of prime production always needs to be either razor edge balanced or operating at a loss. i.e. over predation. In EVE everything is overshooting prey dynamic, but mostly because predators have taken over the roles of prime producers/prey. Without specialisation i.e species variation the game as an ecosystem dies.

    In the attempt to make EVE more PVP friendly it killed the design and the premise around PREY and the Predator prey dynamic. The flawed assumption was that “no one wants to do the tedious stuff” in this case mostly referred to the “grazing”. Sure lions should not graze, but when a Lion starves its because there is not enough sheep to feed on, you dont get more sheep in the ecosystem by removing their role or chasing them out of the game.

    September 7, 2019 at 11:42 am
    • You say I’m not even wrong, but then I think you agree with most of my article? It’s really early local time, so it’s possible my sleep-deprived brain is missing something.

      September 7, 2019 at 12:08 pm
      • Caleb Ayrania Alizabeth

        I think from the premise of the article we might disagree of what is wrong, or rather what went wrong. Which is why I wrote a minor wall of text comment.

        From my perspective what went wrong was exactly related to a predator protection agenda, which completely failed and resulted in worse conditions for predators.

        A good example is related to making a living as a predator. The gunmining nerf, the loot fairy rolls and ship balance all lead to “starvation” of the predators. The carrying capacity and activity required i.e. successful hunts and resulting “food yields” all got undermined by CCP designs. Fundamentally CCP missed the point and completely went wrong in balancing the ecosystem. The most blatant mistakes ofc was anoms and rorquals and SP catchup. They are well known, but a lot of commentators seem to overlook the smaller changes like how many hunts needed to “sustain a predator”..

        In all honesty its a long and complicated analysis required, because in EVE each little nudge and appearently small change can have huge ramifications further down the line. When CCP seems incapable of understanding such things and only QoL creep one step at the time, you end up completely destroying the original premise of the simulator, and few understand what actually went wrong and why the “Streams are straightening out” or why honey bees are dying.

        EVE never needed an economist, it needed an ecologist to do QA checks on game design changes. 🙂

        September 7, 2019 at 12:20 pm
        • I’m on vacation banging out op-ed pieces on an essentially souped-up chrome book. I am sure that someone can do a detailed dive on this topic. However, I just wanted to point out that the conventional wisdom about EVE being a PVP game is wrong.

          September 7, 2019 at 12:49 pm
        • Arrendis Caleb Ayrania

          Lots of words here. Write an article, Caleb 😛

          September 7, 2019 at 1:41 pm
          • I agree! I am happy for intelligent debate. I look forward to what Caleb comes up with.

            September 7, 2019 at 1:49 pm
          • Caleb Ayrania Arrendis

            I do TV shows.. 🙂 but I can throw a few words together since you are insisting.

            September 7, 2019 at 2:03 pm
        • zeenkz Caleb Ayrania

          rorquals begat supercarriers begat supercap defensive umbrellas.

          remove rorquals or maybe make them more vulnerable (no panic?)

          September 10, 2019 at 2:41 pm
    • Garreth Vlox Caleb Ayrania

      “most PVP games make it “easy” to progress by PVP alone.”

      Incorrect. In a PVP game PVP is REQUIRED to advance, the difficulty of the PVP itself is irrelevant. You can’t level up in call of duty, team fortress, counter strike, rainbow 6 siege, or overwatch without shooting other players in pvp game modes, that’s what makes them PVP games. Conversely you can get every single skill in Eve trained to 5, buy every single skin and build/buy and fly every single ship without ever undocking or shooting at another player when you do undock, Eve is a PVE space based simulator with the option to PVP.

      September 7, 2019 at 10:03 pm
      • Romulus Loches Garreth Vlox

        This really depends on your definition of winning. Is the ultimate goal of Eve to have every skill trained to 5 and own every skin and ship?

        I mean, we usually refer to “winning Eve” when someone quits the game…

        September 7, 2019 at 10:28 pm
        • Garreth Vlox Romulus Loches

          You said “progress” not “win”. That’s not even close to the same goal posts.

          September 9, 2019 at 2:23 am
          • Romulus Loches Garreth Vlox

            Ummm, I didn’t say “progress” in replying to you. If you are referring to the original comment, that is a different person.

            September 13, 2019 at 5:02 am
          • Garreth Vlox Romulus Loches

            Yes, and I was commenting on your use of the word “progress”, then you suddenly started talking about winning.

            September 14, 2019 at 1:57 am
  • Romulus Loches

    While I’m not sure I entirely disagree with your premise of Eve not being a PvP game, I can’t agree with the way you came to this conclusion. You repeatedly use the comparison between Eve and World of Warships, but this is a flawed argument. The problem is that they are fundamentally different games.

    World of Warships is a first or third person shooter, while Eve is a virtual sandbox. This means that World of Warships has only one function, shooting things, and has a linear progression where players slowly work toward better and better ships.

    Eve doesn’t limit the types of activities to just shooting, and it doesn’t have a limited linear progression. Sure, you can slowly train into bigger ships, but you can also just work on marketing skills, mining, exploration, industry, etc.

    The question if Eve is a PvE or PvP game is ultimately decided by the player. For some, PvE is just a means to an end, being PvP. If a player could sustain themselves purely on PvP through loot dropped by other player, they might choose to do just that. For other people, the game could be all about amassing as much wealth as possible, or achieve what they feel is the highest level of PvE. Even above and beyond those are the people who see both PvP and PvE as mere tools for dominating the meta and social aspect of the game.

    In essence, the comparisons being made aren’t between games in the same genre and therefore of course they are significantly different. A more accurate comparison would have to be made between Eve and a sandbox game that is considered a PvP game.

    September 7, 2019 at 9:52 pm
    • Manek Dubash Romulus Loches

      Ofc, it depends what you mean by PVP. It’s arguable that when mining, ratting, market trading etc you are competing with other player (for resources etc). So that’s a form of PVP – just without any shooting.

      September 7, 2019 at 10:17 pm
      • Romulus Loches Manek Dubash

        That’s a very good point. When people just stay in a station, buying and selling items to make a profit, it’s often called market PvP…

        September 7, 2019 at 10:26 pm
        • Bo Hunt Romulus Loches

          There are also those of us that don’t PvP by shooting ships, but PvP with words 😉

          September 12, 2019 at 12:26 am
          • Romulus Loches Bo Hunt

            Now that is my favorite type of PvP 😉

            September 12, 2019 at 1:20 am
    • Caleb Ayrania Romulus Loches

      IRonically EVE has a lot in common with non-level based progression Pen and Paper games like World of Darkness. This type caters to a completely different type of player than say DnD. You dont play for game mechanic progress, you play for more RP based and meta goals.

      September 7, 2019 at 10:56 pm
      • Arrendis Caleb Ayrania

        I have known far too many people who take WoD and use it for xp-meter-centric combat-monster gaming to agree with this statement. And a fair number of D&D players who can make really compelling story and RP out of even the original rules set. (Dave Arneson was amazing at that.)

        September 9, 2019 at 7:37 am
    • Arrendis Romulus Loches

      Well, I believe that’s kind of exactly the point. Look at games that are primarily PvP games: they’re built around PvP from the ground up. That’s all you have to do, if that’s all you want to do. WoT/WP/WS. LoL. Even WoW’s PvP system, from open-world to BGs to Arenas, you can advance and improve all your gear, all your capabilities, without doing anything other than PvP.

      Not so in EVE. Either you have to PLEX for ISK, or—as a general rule—you have to engage in PvE. About the only ways to make money without PvEing are: a)steal from other players, b)freighter ganking (which is about to get seriously gimped), or c)market trading. But even market trading is a limited environment. The vast majority of players will never be market moguls. All of those are heavily niche roles in the EVE ecology. Most people have to PvE.

      And if the average player has to PvE in order to enable his PvP, then PvP is not the core of the game. PvP is the reward you get for doing PvE.

      September 9, 2019 at 7:13 am
      • Romulus Loches Arrendis

        The closest kind of thing I can think of to a PvP sandbox game is an open world game. Those games might have some things like crafting, or make money by just trading, but ultimately ‘progress’ in the game is defined by a combat system. Now a lot of the time that combat can be either PvP or PvE, but it is still more combat oriented than something like Eve.

        September 12, 2019 at 1:10 am
  • Rammel Kas

    I don’t get why people try shoe horn a sandbox game into one or the other style. Why not play all of the game? What could possibly happen if a single group brought all the aspects into one place. Oh wait… that Tribute thing happened didn’t it so we know…

    September 7, 2019 at 10:12 pm
  • Total Newbie

    This is a fine article. Lots of good points. The problem with Eve is that it IS a sandbox, and people come into it with an expectation of a 1st person shooter. Look at all the 1st person shooters that come and go. I have said countless times, that when a developer immerses itself into the meta, it will only end badly. We are only seeing the beginnings of this currently.

    September 7, 2019 at 10:44 pm
  • Olmeca Gold

    There are two kinds of reasons why someone would play Eve.

    1) There are those who acquire assets and grow empires for the sake of owning things.
    2) There are those who acquire assets and grow empires to do PvP things with them.

    Current Eve, the stagnation, chaos era, etc. is all because people ran out of PvP things to do with the assets they acquired. You can wear your titan as a badge of honor. But the asset acquisition game expires and you get bored pretty quick without things to do in it.

    A lot of you play Eve for the social PvE, asset acquisition, and the feeling of belonging you derive to an empire. But even you get bored, let alone the PvP players. Without the PvP aspect, Eve is nothing much. Compare the anomalies you run in nullsec to raids people run in WoW, you’ll quickly notice how outdated Eve as a PvE game is.

    September 8, 2019 at 4:44 pm
    • Oh, I agree! EVE as a PVE game sucks quite a bit. My point, however, is that PVE is still the only mandatory part of the game. More or less everyone has to PVE at some point. And all these changes that CCP wants to make for the Age of Chaos neglect at best, or damage at worst, the PVE foundation of the game. I love PVP as much as the next girl, but there is a lot more to PVP than a few people hunting ratters in null.

      Currently in EVE, wars are pointless. That needs to change, and I have a few thoughts about that coming out soon.

      September 8, 2019 at 6:36 pm
    • Garreth Vlox Olmeca Gold

      “Compare the anomalies you run in nullsec to raids people run in WoW, you’ll quickly notice how outdated Eve as a PvE game is.”

      That’s a great comparison, and one would think the focus should be on fixing the fact that PVE is a boring shit show instead of doing everything possible to discourage PVE across he board in nullsec.

      September 9, 2019 at 2:28 am
    • Arrendis Olmeca Gold

      There are two kinds of reasons why someone would play Eve.

      1) There are those who acquire assets and grow empires for the sake of owning things.
      2) There are those who acquire assets and grow empires to do PvP things with them.

      I fall into neither category, and never have.

      I got into EVE because a friend recommended it to me, and I figured we could check it out together. Then I quit, because the PvE is ass, and in 2004, the PvE was less engaging than watching zone loading screens in EQ.

      I got back into EVE several times, because I really found the NPC stories interesting. Then in 2009, a bunch of people I raided with in WoW decided to try it out, and this time, there were enough of us that there was a social aspect to it that lasted long enough for us to go exploring the then-new wormholes. Eventually, we shut down our C4 and I stopped playing again. Six months later, one of them called me up and said ‘hey, we’re all going out to null to try that. c’mon’. And so I went. And I’ve been out here since, even though every one of them has left the game.

      I play EVE to do things with my friends, and because I genuinely like the (very slowly) unfolding story of the Empires of New Eden. Not just the null empires, either. All of them—null and NPC both—have their own solid storylines, and it’s really a joy to watch it all unfold around me.

      The PvE could stand to not be utter shite, but the story is really good.

      But my reasons for playing EVE have nothing to do with owning things, and they nothing to do with PvP or asset acquisition. I couldn’t give less of a damn about ‘stuff’, and I loathe what you consider EVE’s PvP.

      PvP in EVE is only interesting at the largest scales—the strategic level. Strategic PvP can be slow. It can be ponderous—in the sense of actually pondering moves and countermoves. Immediate, kinetic PvP like EVE’s small gang is meant to be should be visceral. It should be immersive and feral and immediately gratifying. Something blows up, you should get that moment to appreciate the close-up of the enemy’s destruction.

      EVE doesn’t even let you appreciate the moment of *your own* destruction. No sudden shift to watching your ship spark, shudder, and explode into several trailing pieces of debris. Just a sudden ‘you’re in the pod!’ where because of latency issues, you either pop up in an insta-warping capsule and try to get out with a crappy warp speed… or before your client has even registered ‘your ship blew up, let’s put you in your pod’, your invulnerability has expired and some dumbass popped you.

      Small gang fights, solo duels, they’re just as boring as solo dueling in WoW. It’s all masturbation, and if I want that, I’ve got two perfectly good hands that’ll give me a hell of a lot more dopamine release than some idiot blinking off my overview will.

      September 10, 2019 at 7:45 am
    • zeenkz Olmeca Gold

      I PVE to fund my PVP. That being said…PVE can also be a chill way to play the game. I went to VNI ratting during war as carrier ratting was getting too dangerous. Now I don’t even do that.

      I was about to buy plex to MCU on my two pay-to-play accounts and move those two additional toons to nullsec. Now…nope.

      September 10, 2019 at 2:36 pm
  • Kawira

    Yeah CCP is tackling problem from bad side. PvE in Eve got currently 2 problems:
    1. It’s super boring
    2. It can be easily done afk

    Instead of stupid ‘chaos era’ devs should focus on those 2 aspects and bring main part of the game to modern standards

    September 9, 2019 at 8:58 am
  • Garreth Vlox

    Is that you hilmar?

    September 14, 2019 at 1:58 am