Talk:Eve Online/Archive 2

message: The ships section drastically needs an overhaul. There are numerous gramatical errors, as well as copied information from a specific Wiki page dealing with ships. Titans have been seen in-game, therefore, that part of the article is outdated. The added information about Band of Brothers winning a Mothership is irrelevant. Zugor 04:41, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm removing the second paragraph that has the references to not seeing Titans in game and Band of Brothers winning a Mothership. If you see any reason to keep it let me know.....--Fenrig 15:25, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ships 

message: Given the general consensus that the page is now much less POV than it used to be, and since there are no POV problems currently being argued, I've removed the neutrality tag.  Please comment here if you feel this is in error. Justin Johnson 17:06, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed Neutrality Tag 

message: Are a huge step back in overall quality/neutrality of the article. Am I the only one that thinks this? --86.2.153.77 02:50, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I agree with you.  As complimentary as his changes are, they're not NPOV and they're not really encyclopedic. Justin Johnson 21:41, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Muthsera's additions 

message: :EVE currently costs €14.95 / $14.95 a month (the European cost is higher as VAT is included). However, like other MMOGs, the cost can be reduced by paying for larger subscription intervals.*
Ok, to what does the asterisk at the end refer?  Also, the website says the monthly cost is $19.95.
::What you see on the EVE account website is the cost for creating the account, that includes one month, after that the month is at $/€14.95. And about the asterisk... I have no idea :/ --Gussi 22:16, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cost 

message: Is the Eve Online corporation discussed in the second paragraph of Tyrell Corporation notable, or is it just someone spamming his game clan? -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 16:50, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have certainly heard of Tyrell Corp. within EvE. I don't think it is particuarly notable you could probably go through the majority of articles on Wikipedia and note some relation to EVE, some of which could be notable and some may not be. Simple answer: perhaps notable to those who play EVE, to everyone else not notable. -- Richard Slater 20:25, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tyrell Corporation

message: There was this link to a story about some guy scamming a lot of other people...where can I find it now?
:you mean the Guiding Hand Social Club scam. I'll see if I can find it. Cabadrin
::Just google Guiding Hand Social Club scam and you'll get lots of hits, including scans of the original article in PC Gamer. Justin Johnson 02:34, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where did that story go? 

message: I have changed tha affliate link from AffiliateID 100661 to AffiliateID 100001 which is CCP's own link (thus money won't be paid by CCP to other people for traffic generated from Wikipedia). --Richard Slater 21:11, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Have reverted yet another change to the free trials section, this partuclar free trial was veiled by a fowarding domain. However the domain eve-online-trial.com is not registered to CCP hf. --Richard Slater 17:33, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

text: The "Buddy Spam" edits have been comming from three different IP addresses all with the netname NEOSTRADA-ADSL (A polish ISP). I would assume that this is the same user with a DHCP ADSL connection. Shall we continue to revert to a neutral affiliate link? or would it be more helpful to remove the official link in its entirity? --Richard Slater 18:07, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the official link too, hoped it would stop giving people ideas. Up to you --86.2.153.77 05:34, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Affiliate Link 

message: When I first started playing EVE, I had a lot of difficulty finding the differences between races in terms of combat and play style anywhere on the official EVE online forums or fan pages. The only available online text to my knowledge would be the background chronicles, but those only give extremely vague descriptions of each races' game play style.
I recommended adding a short section on the strengths, weaknesses, and abilities of each races' ships and weapons. While I know one could argue that abilities are heavily based on the player (and his/her skills) in specific, I'm simply suggesting we add at least some basic information on the key differences between the races. At least enough to help out starting players.
Paul Hooper 18:40, May 09 2006 (UTC)
: The only difference between the races are their starting stats, I know these were listed in the retail manual, and presume they're listed someone on the eve site. --86.2.153.77 20:36, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The thing is that what you fly and how you play is not dictated by your race. There are 4 playable races (Gallente, Caldari, Amarr and Minmatar) and 4 different ships types (Gallente, Caldari, Amarr and Minmatar). It is by no means set in stone that Gallente players can fly only Gallente ships. Some special (faction) ships even require skills from 2 different races. So, styles of play are determined by what you fly, not who you are. Those are: Gallente are armor tankers and fight with drones and hybrid weapons. Caldari are shield tankers and fight with missiles (hybrids too, but very rarely). Amarr are armor tankers and fight with lasers. Minmatar I have no idea about. Find out about Minmatars and put this. But be sure to note that none of this is set in stone. Shinhan 15:13, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Races 

message: Last I checked free trials are now restricted in more ways than just transfer of ISK. For instance, I believe they can't fly Mining Barges - possibly other ship types either, in order to disencourage ISK farmers.
Not so sure on what exactly else is limited or I'd modify the Cost section accordingly.
159.51.236.194 11:39, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I know/recall, Mining Barges, Industrial Ships, Assault Ships, Battleships, and Heavy Assault Ships cannot be flown on Trial accounts (the skills can't be trained by them, as said in their descriptions.) I'm not sure if these are all that are restricted, or even if they are (having a bit of doubt about Assault Ships/Battleships), but I do know that Mining Barges and Heavy Assault Ships can't be trained on trial. --Jsloan31 00:40, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Last time I checked Destroyers we're also restricted, bad move in my opinion, Destroyers is usually what players buy after getting bored of the frigates. --Gussi 21:16, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Limitations on free trial? 

message: Sorry if this shouldn't be under a new section, but here goes. Should "Cold War Edition" and "Red Moon Rising" really be considered expansions? Based on my understanding, they are only major Content Patches (according to a few dev statements), but not full-scale Expansions.
--Jsloan31 11:13, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: *There is no significant distinction to be made. Alex Bartho 07:46, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansions 

message: This section is far too large. I can see several entries that are generic MMO jargon, a few more that mean the same thing, and quite a few that aren't all that useful, or could be moved to a different location like the ship nicknames. Does anyone have any opinions on what to do with the section? --Tom Edwards 09:44, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Remove it, like a lot of the article it's bloated/pointless. I'm going to have a go at updating and streaminlining it, but it might be controversial. --Bastion 15:04, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *I ran through it two days ago, some horrid errors in there, fixed 'em and added some content. Now when it's gone, well, the article looks alot better, I wont miss it. --Gussi 09:20, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Be more careful, you removed most of the article! --Tom Edwards 10:38, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *I removed the a)useless, b)extraneous and c)incorrect/out of date parts. It's massively bloated and needs to be trimmed down, for example copying the backstory verbatim from the eve site when it can just be linked. --Bastion 19:58, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Actually, you removed all the jargon from the main page and might have relocated it.  However, someone seems to have deleted the page it was referencing.  I have recreated it at the link that magically disappeared.  EVE Online terms and acronyms will be the new home, and hopefully it will stick around this time. I found it very helpful when I was a newbie.  If anyone else has to surf the history to find it, it's here.--GoNINzo 20:44, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gameplay Jargon 

message: I've been watching the number of "players online" bit of the article, with some intrest.  It seems to change every week (At least) with nothing to back it up.  As a suggestion I'd say stick to the news releases from CCP.  (I changed the article to match the last news post jan 2, 2006).  --ShakataGaNai 18:07, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Players Online 

message: The text 'This is known to the player base as a "CONCORDOKEN"' has been added and removed more than once. I've been playing EVE for more than 2 years and had never heard of this term until I saw its use here. Should this text be included or not? DJMalone 18:38, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Having also played for over two years I must admit I wouldn't consider it in the normal list of EVE phrases, however google  comes up with a reasonable list of sources. I personaly would say if it must be included include it in a glossary of EVE terms - something I don't think is partucarly required in this article. Richard Slater 21:28, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *There used to be a list of EVE slang on the page. It has been removed and I think most of us are fine without it. --Sindri 11:00, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

text: *Been playing for over 2 years... and 10 months ;] And yes, I've heard this term used before, only on few occasions though. --Gussi 23:25, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *You've never heard "CONCORDOKEN!"?  Have you ever been in a 0.0 alliance? David Corbett 02:09, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  CONCORDOKEN 

message: New page about it please?(Not that I believe it deserves to exist mind, but if it has to at least get it off the main page)
:*I agree. To the Wikipedia user seeking a general overview of EVE, I feel there is too much information about weapons. The first paragraph on its own does an adequate job. DJMalone 12:12, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Support this. It's pretty fancrufty. Twinxor t 07:25, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Maybe move it to a new page and make the following changes? 1. Remove the how Hybrid railguns and blasters "work"(i.e. "Hybrid ammunition consists of a metal round that contains an ionized plasma...") it isn't relevant enough to include and all the other weapons don't have that information (not that they need it) 2. Add defender missiles under "Missiles" section. Also indicate the effect of target size on missiles damage.  3. Mention that projectile weapons have ammo for all the damage types. 4. Better missile descriptions, perhaps?  Overall the whole weapons section can use some work. Maybe only show info on ranges, damage types, and weapon characterization--Fenrig 15:17, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weapons