EVE General Discussion

I disagree. I think piracy, aggression, etc. is as natural in EVE as shooting other players in an FPS game.

Easy.

1.Make High Sec as easy and safe as possible, but without any serious ISK prizes.Not even what it has now.Not even LVL 4 missions or any serious profitable mining.A character after 3-4 months will have to move on to get on higher Incomes.Add a really epic arc to get people on the game mechanics and UI and story.Use high sec for Story Arc Missions and Industry.

2.Move any profitable thing from High sec to Low sec.Even war decs.This should be the main playing area for the majority.

3.Nullsec switches to massive ,obscene (yes, even bigger) amounts of income in comparison (not idle cash cows like TECH) , but more dangerous and costly to keep sovereignty (example, one timer for all structures, maximum reinforce 24 hours).

Buffing PVE will gain them a steady flow of subscribers.

A well developed PVE attracts more people whose playstyle isn't PVP (as in ship vs ship) centric. Imo, CCP has always underestimated the PVE importance as a sort of a starter culture for its PVP game. A player who has been subscribing EVE mainly doing PVE activities, may one day decide to to expand into PVP as part of their playstyle. In the meantime, they're fairly integral to the "build" and "harvest" portion of the economic triangle. An example, mission runners forms a consumer market for ammo, mods, ships and faction items. If you're a trader, volume moves much faster near missions hubs.

That said, balance is the key.
Too much PVP, too little PVE = masochism.
Too much PVE, too little PVP = farming MMO.

There's a perpetual tug-of-war between those two.

P.S. I was doing some reading and looking about the Perpetuum forum discussion on their current population issues.
The gist of it, they seem to have overbalanced game towards the masochistic side and is bleeding from the lack of "carebears" Interesting to note.

Free Russian brides with every account

And made the game utter garbage.

Item 2 - why are you trying to dictate how others play Eve?

Forcing people to PvP when they don't want to won't get you new players. It will chase them away.

People PvE to make ISK. PvP is an ISK sink and asking a carebear to go to low sec and get his ship blown up is very contradictory to his nature. PvE and PvP are almost mutually exclusive.

A way to encourage people to go to low sec would be to make a PvE ship able to hold its own against PvPers. But that is not possible because you need a specific fit for PvE and a specific one for PvP.

The problem lies in making them realise that their PvE activities do not, will not, and must not exist in a vacuum and that they have to live with the vagaries of an open and free-for-all-PvP universe. As history has shown, this combination is very very rare and rather attracts soon-gone whiners rather than useful customers. Some might stick around, yes, but will that be any more than those that already do or will it just create a larger volume of whining about how EVE does not behave the way they expect an MMO to behave?

If you're a trader, volume moves faster in the trade hubs, where everyone gathers. Mission runners don't consume nearly enough of anything, except maybe ammo, to be a solid customer base because they only need a handful of anything. The repeat sales are absolutely tiny compared to the volume that continuous ship loss through war creates.

Moreover, PvE people are no more integral to building and harvesting than anyone else because anyone can (and will) take those up if the need arises. Some of it is needed to crate ISK — the grease that makes the war economy run smoothly — but that's about it.

When you finally realise the "Butterfly Effect" only happens on youtube or just has that effect on your wallet. Your actions don't have much meanings and don't affect much, up to nothing, the sandbox.
In return of that promised land you get far too many downsides related to gaming exploits, grieving has almost no limits but most important, brings low to no consequences you can simply avoid using bad game mechanics.

If something I'd like to see happen on top of the obvious awesome work that has been done around NPE and ships rebalance, is the change or implementation of defining rules where your choices WILL bring you consequences and the benefits for those choices in the whole SANDBOX.

The "long term" playing in Eve hits extreme proportions because of a very specific learning curve, like it or hate it but it's an obvious obstacle that I'd like also to see it changed a little bit.
Maybe by introducing a new skill learning system that keeps the actual skills and learning values would push the player to actually go straight for something precise rather than loose time training different stuff -mining, guns, drones, production and after a couple months that character is just good to pin stuff in rifters as the 2 week new alt you made because you know what you're doing this time- this will give those players the feeling they don't progress, even if they will learn them latter for whatever reason the actual system in not intuitive at all.

In the issue of PvP vs PvE there needs to be a bit more understanding of why different people enjoy different play styles. I think it has to do with how they experience The Rush. Some call it The PvP shakes, but either way, its caused by adrenaline.

The Rush is a good felling one gets with and after a burst of adrenaline associated with an exciting experience, like PvP combat. Not everyone gets The Rush. Some get no pleasure from adrenaline, and some actually feel bad or sick from it. According to Dr. Drew Pinsky, the difference between these people is genetic. You are born to get The Rush, or you are not. The result is some players will not enjoy PvP and actively seek to avoid it, and no amount of game tweaking will change that, because game tweaking will not change their genes. After all this is a game, people will tend to avoid game activities that make them sick. Instead they do cooperative activities, industry, missions and the like, or just play as solo players.

People who do not get The Rush can also enjoy activities like fishing, a sport that is more popular that any computer game, even WoW. Or puzzle games, or solitaire, or Golf (one of the most popular pastimes on the planet). These players like an activity that occupies the mind, is relaxing, and gives one a gentle feeling of accomplishment as they watch the isk pile up. For them, a certain amount of repetition is not boring, its reassuring and relaxing.

People who avoid PvP space combat are not afraid of losing their stuff, they are trying to avoid exposure to adrenaline. Adrenaline also cases some bad side effects (http://www.ehow.com/about_5038314_effects-adrenaline-rush.htmlf) to the point I'm wondering if games that have non-consensual PvP may need health warnings, or will at some point become regulated.

If part of the game can be made "Adrenaline free" more such people would be retained. (CCP, I'm sure you got statistics on how many people stop playing after their first non-consensual PvP experience.) How can that be done? Well, high sec is already very close.

If you are not in a player corp and stay in high sec all you have to deal with are suicide ganks. An interesting question is if having suicide ganks in the game increase or decrease subs. If they were removed, would it really impact the game as a whole much, or just impact those few players who like to do them?

Also CCP mentioned (at fanfest) the idea of a "Corp lite", a player "corp" that is little more than a chat channel. It cannot join an alliance, or put up a POS, or be in a war, and it pays the NPC corp tax. Players already set these up, maybe we need it formalized into the game for the adrenaline adverse.