open All Channels
seplocked EVE Fiction
blankseplocked The End of New Eden?
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.

Author Topic

Seismic Stan
Greenbeard's Freebooters
Split Infinity.
Posted - 2010.09.18 18:16:00 - [1]

I recently tried to figure out whether the ongoing loss of life across known space was sustainable. I blogged my results on Freebooted.

The figures are pretty arbitrary, but the principle I think is sound. It shows that, with our current understanding of how the EVE universe works, it would be impossible for the population to sustain the ongoing attrition rates.

I would be interested to know how this hole in the lore could be plugged.

Posted - 2010.09.20 08:14:00 - [2]

Oh snap. Is there any eve lore to indicate how much of npc ships use capsuleers? It seems like the fact that 1 capsuleer can replace upward of 5k crew on a BS would make it highly economical for the factions. Yes capsuleer cloning tech has to be expensive, but so is 5k crew per BS.

Tavin Aikisen
Revenent Defence Corperation
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
Posted - 2010.09.21 01:12:00 - [3]

First Flying Wing Inc
Posted - 2010.09.21 08:13:00 - [4]

I would reconcile it by assuming that the NPC ships we kill represent an entirely in game, mechanical entity, that is used in place of forcing us to surch for hours to find a single NPC ship/patrol and kill that, which would have a far higher bounty, drops more loot, and the wreck(s) salvage to a level similer to that of a player wreck. So in reality NPC ships loses might only be a tenth or even a hundredth of those we see in game, simply because we, unlike our pilots, don't live in new Eden and don't have all day to look for one ship to kill.
TL;DR, the time spent hunting a NPC or running a mission has the enemies 'spread out' into many more, weaker ships with less reward so that we can have a much smoother time/reward graph, and more interesting events.

Wyke Mossari
Posted - 2010.09.21 09:43:00 - [5]

I think a few of your assumptions are questionable, but a very interesting read.

1) I think your Planet population estimates are too low. I would assume that most Empire Temperate planet have populations similar (or even above) earth. The same is probably true for a few low-sec planets like Intaki. I think your 2 Billion average is probably reasonable for planets outside high-sec, with some being high like Intaki and others being very low. (Earth population has grown from about 1.6 Billion in 1900 to over 6 Billion in 2000) a similar period as the planet colonisation growth of New Eden. Human populations growth is mainly limited by resources not predators (and capsuleers are not found on planets :) We also know from the Seyllin incident that even highly inhospitable planets can have populations of 500 Million people. We also know from various chronicles that even inhospitable planets are inhabited by families so are subject to organic growth.

2) That all crew die when a ship is destroyed. We know that ships have crew escape pods. How many many escape. It could easily be most crew escape in most battles. You are also assuming that when a ship is defeated it is destroyed, what proportion are simply incapacitated, spectacular graphics aside.

3) I think your estimates of NPC ships destroyed is high because you picked a busy system and blood bath system. I've just looked at a number of hub systems and they look to lose between 200 and 2000 ships per hour. There are quite a few systems even in high sec that only loss a handful of NPC ships a day.

It is something the GM lore team, should probably look at. My feeling is that the crew figures should be historical for non-capsule ships and capsule ships should have much fewer crew, probably around 5% of the historical lore crew numbers.

Another consideration, will all NPC ships always have a full crew complement. How many crew are mission specialists, a full complement would be required on extended or deep space missions but not always when defending bases with maintenance hangers, (missions & explorations sites).

Todd Ayumbhara
Posted - 2010.09.21 17:15:00 - [6]

You're also forgetting about people living in deadspace pockets or on non-celestial stations. It's implied in The Burning Life that there are people (the general populace of the factions) living in stations in space; the habitations you encounter in missions you may or may not need to destroy. So conceivably there could be trillions of regular workers hiding throughout the galaxy in these pockets.

Thgil Goldcore
Posted - 2010.10.04 04:47:00 - [7]

I think what you have there is mostly accurate, although I think there are three oversights which make it so it may take a little longer before the end of new eden.

First, as a few chronicles point out, there are quite a number of survivors to any given wreck. just because a ship blows up doesn't guarantee everyone aboard dies. Ships are mounted with escape pods which means that if a ship is taken down very slowly many of the crew has the ability to escape. I would say a good half of the crew may be able to survive to fight another day.

Second, yes, earth has roughly 6billion people, but it is by no means 'full.' While true with our current technology if we have just a few billion more people living on earth we would overtax our resources. But in a future whereas we can mine organic molecules from gas clouds and use fusion core reactors, its easy to imagine a world with 50 or 60 billion people living comfortably on it, and in cases of some 'capital' worlds perhaps a hundred billion.

Third, if the population of New eden was being depleted by being destroyed in space, less people would sign up. Crews would have more and more skeleton crews which would further decrease the death toll. If the universe was reaching a critical point in population ships would have hardly anyone aboard and more would be done via automated systems. Less ships would be flown by non-capsoleers and there would be a focus on quality over quantity. After all I imagine the only reason why pirates like the Angels have so many weak ships is an abundance of manpower. Lower that manpower and they would spend their resources on more powerful ships instead. This would have a strong impact on the loss of life throughout the universe

In all, I think your right. The population of New Eden is likely in the red, which after 2 or 3 generations may lead to some serious problems. I don't think its quite as dire as first advertised though. It does go to show that the future of man is quite a bleak place.


This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to

These forums are archived and read-only