Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

40 Excellent

About Sklex

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

71 profile views
  1. JITA is Eve's primary player hub. It's the primary location for trade and short of a small army of scammers, it's pretty much the primary PvE square. Months in the planning, Burn Jita involved a group of 1500+ player who built an army of 15,000 small single purpose suicide ships. They raided JITA. The largest most popular player hub managing to control the Concord retaliation and destroy thousands of players ships in the process. They disrupted trade to the area for a couple of days and according to some manipulated the market in order to turn a tidy profit. We are talking about a situation where they would shoot and the police would zoom in and insta-pop them. And they still managed to maintain the numbers and the resources to keep the attack up for days. Even if you don't care about Eve... you gotta admit... that's pretty cool for a completely player driven event.
  2. Eve does PvE in a special way. Even though it's safe it's really not safe. Here PvE means the game mechanics stop you from hitting each other. In Eve the Concord (aka police) stop you from hitting each other. Just like in real life where you can choose to break the law acknowledging that actions have consequences you can attack players in the High Sec areas. But as soon as you do your days are numbered. Concord come down on your like a bat outta hell. But... with the right amount of players and the right amount of logistics and resources... the players were able to prove that anything was possible.
  3. It could be though. It could be a hugely successful and thoroughly enjoyable experience for everyone. The very significant difference with Ark is they can turn servers on an off as the demand increases or lowers. That's not how Atlas works. If they turn off servers here they are directly impacting on the experience of everyone. In Eve you can transfer game-time. Effectively real hard earned money. And pirates they can blow up your ship and take that game-time and use it or sell it or loose it again. Ever read about the guy who pulled of such a large scam that he made enough money to put a deposit down on a real house? The point being that Eve creates PvP that people enjoy reading about. It creates PvP that people want to be part of. Can Atlas or Ark make similar claims? Just because you can hit something when no one is there does not make it hard-core.
  4. Oh and to be clear. We are not recommending Eve's design because it's a care bear roller coaster MMO. It's about as hard-core as they come... but they made it work. They made it so the different demographics of players can co-exist and in doing so were successful.
  5. Ark is a multi-player game with significantly less cost to keep the power on. This is an MMO with significantly bloody high costs to keep running. The two are not the same thing even if they look like it on the surface. You can be sure of one thing though. The hard-core PVP players are not going to have the numbers to make it worthwhile for Grapeshot Games to maintain the servers. This game needs players and in order to do that something needs to be done to attract players and you do not attract players by appealing to the hardcore. They are the minority. It's why there are so many more 'carebear roller coaster' MMO's versus HC Sandbox MMO's. Publishers follow the $$ and the money is in the masses. Go do some research on how Eve works, open your mind to the possibilities and then come back and tell us why you think it wont work in this game. That will be a discussion worth happening. Look at the depth of the game-play available versus what Atlas actually offers. All the Eve players I've seen are frothing at the mouth with the potential here and that should say something to the Dev's given they launched with the whole "We are taking a lot of inspiration from Eve" line. How many world wars have you had in Ark? They wrote a book about the Eve ones.
  6. Just take Eve. Analyse it. Implement what they have done in similar but acceptable ways for this setting. Everyone stands to win this way. The game will recover its numbers. PvE players will play the game. PvP players will hunt them. More PvP opportunities will be created. Just look at their numbers. This is player count over the years. This is a game that got the design right. But unlike Eve, Atlas cannot be called a spreadsheet in sea game and stands to do a lot better if they get it right.
  7. Sklex

    LAN support needed.

    Of course it impacts the mmo players. Development takes time and resources. Both of which should be applied to finishing the game as it was originally intended and sold.
  8. Sklex

    Captain's Log 19: The Golden Age of Piracy

    It's not been released yet.
  9. People are doing this.
  10. Sklex

    Degression of total playerbase (Ark & Atlas)

    Nope. Eve did something very right.
  11. The thing that most people miss when discussing this sort of concept is the different types of game-play that it unlocks. Right now for example, game-play for a PvE player involves harvesting, building, levelling and perhaps some PvE combat against ghost ships and maps. The Eve design however means a heap of other types of game-play open up. Harvesting for profit Playing the market (buy low, selling high) Becoming a trade merchant (moving stock from one port to the next) Building for profit (create things to sell to the PvP players) Player run businesses (Eve players run banks, gambling dens) Eve even had players playing solely in the meta game. Gathering intel from one side and selling it to the other for example. People who have never experienced it obviously can't understand why this works. But it does. It takes the game to new heights and the reason why some of us are excited and having these conversations is we can see the foundation exists for this to work. We want this game to be incredible and believe it's possible for that to be achieved.
  12. I disagree so much with this. Right now the game is hollow and meaningless. You see people build so they can destroy each other and then repeat the process over and over again. The game lacks long term progression that is the primary ingredient that keeps people coming back to play MMOs. I believe that the biggest failure of the game so far is they picked up an multi-player game (Ark) and expected the same formula to work in an MMO environment. People are leaving because the game is appealing only to the griefers and people who can play for endless hours at a time. Majority of people in my experience don't like the pure risk game-play we see now. In our head we do, we would all love to be able to pump the hours in and claim success but ultimately it's simply not possible for the average joe that actually has a life. Server Admins literally advertise their wipe dates in order to attract people back to the server knowing that people leave once 'Alpha' companies have begun to dominate. It's a true indication that this is not yet a MMO. With the number of servers required to maintain an official server and the associated cost you can be sure of one thing. The game does not appeal to enough players to make it financially viable to keep the lights on. This idea absolutely needs balancing in regards to resource availability to make it work though. The risk comes from the need to gather specific resources which in turn creates the PvP opportunities. Do this right, on a very large (aka official size) server and that's where it would really begin to work. The distance and time required to travel will see companies venture out into PvP waters in order to settle. Just have to look at Eve to know this is true because it's been happening for years. They will do it for the increased resources and they will stay there because its not time efficient to keep coming back into a safe port. What I'm talking about here is nothing more than trying to set the game up so that it replicates the real world environment. Areas of civilisation that had law and order. Areas that had yet to be civilised that did not.
  13. Agree completely. This is a more robust version of a PvP game designed to make meaningful PvP occur. It's clear the Dev's never designed this as a PvE game and want to take it in a PvP direction though.
  14. A full size server would be bloody incredible. The one I posted above was only posted at that size due to the restriction of funding. Tbh I would make the PvE zones larger with clusters of squares together. Effectively creating PvE regions in different locations across the map. Even go as far as to have different AI factions that rules them. Possibly even a high end PvE end-game where they can sign up to fight for their faction and help expand their area of control with a way for the pirates or other factions to fight back.
  15. In a game like this there needs to be an element of Risk vs Reward. To put all the PvE together creates too much safety. The point is to avoid a situation where players can remain self sustainable in a single square. Granted I agree, the map is too small. This really needs to be done on officials to make it the best possible experience. Personally, I'm more interested in the PvE side of this equation. So no, I'm not interested in easy targets at all. I want to be chased. I want to feel the excitement of risk without the sheer destruction that comes with the current design. Trade is already occurring so I disagree with you. Do this properly and people will find themselves in greater supply of somethings and lacking in others. Thus the reason to trade is created. It's becomes more efficient to trade and safer than it does to gather the resources in some situations. Keeping in mind market places are coming. People will build in both PvE and PvP. That much is certain. Just gotta design the game in a way that it's balanced across both for different tiers of game-play.