These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Alphas and F2P Have Failed
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#301 - 2017-03-17 21:35:29 UTC
Rroff wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:


Your proposal fails to do what you claim you want. You are asking CCP to do what you can’t or won’t (mostly won't).


What are you talking about? though my proposal is mostly not intended seriously it would (with a bit of tweaking and some other changes I didn't go into as it wasn't intended entirely seriously) make real consequences for taking an action - the only people who wouldn't like it are those who just like to kill easy targets with little risk of actual comeback.

EDIT: Don't confuse what I'm saying with something I necessarily want - its more a commentary on what I have observed is one aspect having an impact on a declining player base and reduced uptake of new players compared to the potential - personally I'm quite happy with highsec how it is (not that I play any more) but that is because I know how to navigate those dangers and it adds some interesting elements when you know there is some risk even though if I do say so myself I've become fairly competent at mitigating them.


In either sense it isn't going to give you what you are trying to accomplish.

If you want a person to have risk...go increase their risk. Risk is not something the game gives, risk is based off of player choices and actions. People do not want to take the actions necessary to impose risk on other players. Gankers can and do avoid the FacPo, but it would be much harder to avoid players. Get a fleet going, get a guy who can do scanning, warp into the gankers and start activating kill rights and kill them. I bet many of them have several kill rights, so if they come back...kill them again.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#302 - 2017-03-17 21:41:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Rroff
Teckos Pech wrote:


In either sense it isn't going to give you what you are trying to accomplish.

If you want a person to have risk...go increase their risk. Risk is not something the game gives, risk is based off of player choices and actions. People do not want to take the actions necessary to impose risk on other players. Gankers can and do avoid the FacPo, but it would be much harder to avoid players. Get a fleet going, get a guy who can do scanning, warp into the gankers and start activating kill rights and kill them. I bet many of them have several kill rights, so if they come back...kill them again.


Reality is it often doesn't work like that - many are for instance purely catalyst alts that login just for a gank, log out again - would need a lot of luck and being right place right time to even interdict them enroute to a gank - some just shuttle to a waiting orca, etc. with a very narrow opportunity to get them (I'm a little out of date on this so tactics might be different now).

PS I'm not some hippy loving carebear :p - I've blagged the odd officer fit tengu, marauders and half a dozen freighters in my time :s
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#303 - 2017-03-17 22:13:18 UTC
Rroff wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:


In either sense it isn't going to give you what you are trying to accomplish.

If you want a person to have risk...go increase their risk. Risk is not something the game gives, risk is based off of player choices and actions. People do not want to take the actions necessary to impose risk on other players. Gankers can and do avoid the FacPo, but it would be much harder to avoid players. Get a fleet going, get a guy who can do scanning, warp into the gankers and start activating kill rights and kill them. I bet many of them have several kill rights, so if they come back...kill them again.


Reality is it often doesn't work like that - many are for instance purely catalyst alts that login just for a gank, log out again - would need a lot of luck and being right place right time to even interdict them enroute to a gank - some just shuttle to a waiting orca, etc. with a very narrow opportunity to get them (I'm a little out of date on this so tactics might be different now).

PS I'm not some hippy loving carebear :p - I've blagged the odd officer fit tengu, marauders and half a dozen freighters in my time :s


So go shoot their catalysts. What is the problem? That you can't impose a 5 billion ISK loss on them? Of course not they are not imprudent. In fact they are quite prudent. This is why it is hard to kill them. But they are doing things to make themselves hard to kill. They are taking actions that reduce their risk.

See it yet?

Prudence is good.

Imprudence is bad.

This true in game. This is true out of game.

If somebody is upset because they lost 6 billion ISK worth of cargo...they should be mad, at least in large part, at themselves for taking on so much risk.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Trasch Taranogas
State War Academy
Caldari State
#304 - 2017-03-17 22:16:36 UTC
Nobody in their right mind would play a game where you
are inferior for all time.
Alpha is to lure new players into Omega, nothing more nothing less.
Since it takes months to become decent at anything players find it hard
to open their wallet.

So, either keep the game as is and slowly loose players who eventually
will fall out of interest (way of life) or make newbies feel great and capable
from the very start.

If you always stay ready you don't have to get ready.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#305 - 2017-03-17 22:24:58 UTC
Trasch Taranogas wrote:
Nobody in their right mind would play a game where you
are inferior for all time.
Alpha is to lure new players into Omega, nothing more nothing less.
Since it takes months to become decent at anything players find it hard
to open their wallet.

So, either keep the game as is and slowly loose players who eventually
will fall out of interest (way of life) or make newbies feel great and capable
from the very start.


And how exactly do you do that? SP? And when they die to another player or group of players because they shitfit their ship? Lots of ISK? And when they start burning through it?

Sorry, but your suggestion is about as helpful as, "Lets save the game by saving the game."

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Trasch Taranogas
State War Academy
Caldari State
#306 - 2017-03-17 22:26:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Trasch Taranogas
Teckos Pech wrote:
Trasch Taranogas wrote:
Nobody in their right mind would play a game where you
are inferior for all time.
Alpha is to lure new players into Omega, nothing more nothing less.
Since it takes months to become decent at anything players find it hard
to open their wallet.

So, either keep the game as is and slowly loose players who eventually
will fall out of interest (way of life) or make newbies feel great and capable
from the very start.


And how exactly do you do that? SP? And when they die to another player or group of players because they shitfit their ship? Lots of ISK? And when they start burning through it?

Sorry, but your suggestion is about as helpful as, "Lets save the game by saving the game."


Im not sitting around the table at CCP.

How about skipping those silly weeklong skilltrainingsessions.
Have a set number of skills available at any time. Like inplants without
the gazillion cost. Yeah, everything interesting doesnt have to cost a gazillion.
Why not give players a break, constant fear of dying is not pleasant in any game.

If you always stay ready you don't have to get ready.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#307 - 2017-03-17 22:35:11 UTC
Trasch Taranogas wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Trasch Taranogas wrote:
Nobody in their right mind would play a game where you
are inferior for all time.
Alpha is to lure new players into Omega, nothing more nothing less.
Since it takes months to become decent at anything players find it hard
to open their wallet.

So, either keep the game as is and slowly loose players who eventually
will fall out of interest (way of life) or make newbies feel great and capable
from the very start.


And how exactly do you do that? SP? And when they die to another player or group of players because they shitfit their ship? Lots of ISK? And when they start burning through it?

Sorry, but your suggestion is about as helpful as, "Lets save the game by saving the game."


Im not sitting around the table at CCP.

How about skipping those silly weeklong skilltrainingsessions.
Have a set number of skills available at any time. Like inplants without
the gazillion cost. Yeah, everything interesting doesnt have to cost a gazillion.
Why not give players a break, constant fear of dying is not pleasant in any game.


None of this will do what you seek to accomplish, IMO.

We need to make new players feel empowered! Throw SP at them. Throw ISK at them. Throw ships at them. None of that actually addresses the problem you think you have identified.

And what constant fear of dying. HS is pretty damn safe already. I mean **** on a stick. Look at this. And this. In that last link I convert the amount of ISK value moving around the Forge into US dollars. It is a $33 million. Tell me again about this fear of constantly dying. Roll

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#308 - 2017-03-17 22:39:23 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:


So go shoot their catalysts. What is the problem? That you can't impose a 5 billion ISK loss on them? Of course not they are not imprudent. In fact they are quite prudent. This is why it is hard to kill them. But they are doing things to make themselves hard to kill. They are taking actions that reduce their risk.

See it yet?

Prudence is good.

Imprudence is bad.

This true in game. This is true out of game.

If somebody is upset because they lost 6 billion ISK worth of cargo...they should be mad, at least in large part, at themselves for taking on so much risk.


That is nothing to do with imprudence or prudence - the game mechanics massively null any real risk to them without them having to take any steps whatsoever - you'd have to stalk one of them obsessively without sleeping for days on end to even stand a chance of being in the right place at the right time for those few seconds when they are exposed and some of them will just log out and switch to another alt until kill rights have expired and so on.

Neither am I talking about massive losses - there is only so much prudence can protect you when say mining in a retriever - which are quite common gank targets - much of what I'm talking about is new players losing relatively low value stuff (though not so low value to them) in their first few weeks of playing.
Trasch Taranogas
State War Academy
Caldari State
#309 - 2017-03-17 22:41:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Trasch Taranogas
Teckos Pech wrote:
Trasch Taranogas wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Trasch Taranogas wrote:
Nobody in their right mind would play a game where you
are inferior for all time.
Alpha is to lure new players into Omega, nothing more nothing less.
Since it takes months to become decent at anything players find it hard
to open their wallet.

So, either keep the game as is and slowly loose players who eventually
will fall out of interest (way of life) or make newbies feel great and capable
from the very start.


And how exactly do you do that? SP? And when they die to another player or group of players because they shitfit their ship? Lots of ISK? And when they start burning through it?

Sorry, but your suggestion is about as helpful as, "Lets save the game by saving the game."


Im not sitting around the table at CCP.

How about skipping those silly weeklong skilltrainingsessions.
Have a set number of skills available at any time. Like inplants without
the gazillion cost. Yeah, everything interesting doesnt have to cost a gazillion.
Why not give players a break, constant fear of dying is not pleasant in any game.


None of this will do what you seek to accomplish, IMO.

We need to make new players feel empowered! Throw SP at them. Throw ISK at them. Throw ships at them. None of that actually addresses the problem you think you have identified.

And what constant fear of dying. HS is pretty damn safe already. I mean **** on a stick. Look at this. And this. In that last link I convert the amount of ISK value moving around the Forge into US dollars. It is a $33 million. Tell me again about this fear of constantly dying. Roll


So, you prefer suggestion 1, dont change anything and let players slowly fade away?

Im brainstorming here, what exactly is the point of monthlong skilltrainings? Endagame?
To intimidate newbies? Why do you have to go to "work" (mining, corporate cannonfodder)
for weeks just to get a decent ship or skillbook.

Its like Monopoly in space. Work or perish.

If you always stay ready you don't have to get ready.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#310 - 2017-03-17 22:50:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Rroff wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:


So go shoot their catalysts. What is the problem? That you can't impose a 5 billion ISK loss on them? Of course not they are not imprudent. In fact they are quite prudent. This is why it is hard to kill them. But they are doing things to make themselves hard to kill. They are taking actions that reduce their risk.

See it yet?

Prudence is good.

Imprudence is bad.

This true in game. This is true out of game.

If somebody is upset because they lost 6 billion ISK worth of cargo...they should be mad, at least in large part, at themselves for taking on so much risk.


That is nothing to do with imprudence or prudence - the game mechanics massively null any real risk to them without them having to take any steps whatsoever - you'd have to stalk one of them obsessively without sleeping for days on end to even stand a chance of being in the right place at the right time for those few seconds when they are exposed and some of them will just log out and switch to another alt until kill rights have expired and so on.

Neither am I talking about massive losses - there is only so much prudence can protect you when say mining in a retriever - which are quite common gank targets - much of what I'm talking about is new players losing relatively low value stuff (though not so low value to them) in their first few weeks of playing.


No, the mechanics are the environment. See here:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6875713#post6875713

Quote:
For example, If I put 700 million ISK work of cargo into my tanked freighter and use a scout and manually pilot I'll likely be fine. On the other hand if I were to put 7 billion into an anti-tanked freighter and not use a scout my actions have caused me to face considerably more risk. Note in both instances the game environment is the same, but it is my actions that dictate the level of risk I am taking on.


And why is a pilot mining in a retriever when they can mine a procurer. A procurer can fit a pretty massive tank so that it will take several catalysts to burn you down, at least 4 maybe 5 or 6. And how many miners are ganked while watching Netflix or the like? Again player actions. Choosing a retriever, a very gankable ship. Fitting it with not tank. Watching Netflix. All imprudent actions I’m afraid.

Actions are what make a difference. For the suicide ganker he is taking actions to minimize his risk. He uses a fast aligning ship, he uses safe spots, he uses citadels, he uses cheap ships. He is using the environment to his best advantage whereas their targets, generally, are not.

Edit: Christ I feel like I'm having the same conversation over and over again...some EVE version of Ground Hog Day.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Trasch Taranogas
State War Academy
Caldari State
#311 - 2017-03-17 22:58:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Trasch Taranogas
@Teckos Pech

Im not here to undermine you or the game. I have only played
for 3 months, mainly exploring.
And tomorrow I will get my final essential skill, hacking level 5.

It has not been a pleasant trip, but I occasionally get my frustration
out in WoT and AW.

So, finding a way to ease those first months for a newbie should
be of importance to make a new player addicted.

If you always stay ready you don't have to get ready.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#312 - 2017-03-17 23:01:00 UTC
Trasch Taranogas wrote:


So, you prefer suggestion 1, dont change anything and let players slowly fade away?

Im brainstorming here, what exactly is the point of monthlong skilltrainings? Endagame?
To intimidate newbies? Why do you have to go to "work" (mining, corporate cannonfodder)
for weeks just to get a decent ship or skillbook.

Its like Monopoly in space. Work or perish.


No, but my point is that what you suggest will help the game is something that is very hard to accomplish and may be detrimental to the game. Maybe the better thing to do is tell new players EVE is not like other video games. That it is a harsh and cut-throat game, but if you are patient, learn not only the mechanics, but how to use them you can learn not only how to survive but thrive. Instead of trying to make them great...give them some realistic expectations of the game.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#313 - 2017-03-17 23:04:33 UTC
Trasch Taranogas wrote:
@Teckos Pech

Im not here to undermine you or the game. I have only played
for 3 months, mainly exploring.
And tomorrow I will get my final essential skill, hacking level 5.

It has not been a pleasant trip, but I occasionally get my frustration
out in WoT and AW.

So, finding a way to ease those first months for a newbie should
be of importance to make a new player addicted.


The length of skill training is for game balance. Imagine if everyone started out able to do hacking right out of the gate. You'd find nothing worth exploring. Older more experienced players would be out there getting all the goodies first with an alt. And even if you did find something good, all those people doing exploration would crash the market.

Probably the best thing for player retention is player-on-player interaction. Players who do not interact with other players leave the game the soonest and that includes ship-to-ship combat as one form of interaction.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Trasch Taranogas
State War Academy
Caldari State
#314 - 2017-03-17 23:10:52 UTC
How about this.

Make Highsec antigank, let everybody live in harmony and
AFK the **** out of this game.
On the other hand, make Losec so alluring and profitable that
you are superwilling to take the risks.

Skip those lowtier ships. Let newbies get some decent ships
and beginner skills.

Remove some of that "rock, paper, scissor" mentality from the
dogfights. How about a panicbutton that will teleport you to nearest
highsec space, with cooldown.

If you always stay ready you don't have to get ready.
Trasch Taranogas
State War Academy
Caldari State
#315 - 2017-03-17 23:17:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Trasch Taranogas
Teckos Pech wrote:


The length of skill training is for game balance. Imagine if everyone started out able to do hacking right out of the gate. You'd find nothing worth exploring. Older more experienced players would be out there getting all the goodies first with an alt. And even if you did find something good, all those people doing exploration would crash the market.

Probably the best thing for player retention is player-on-player interaction. Players who do not interact with other players leave the game the soonest and that includes ship-to-ship combat as one form of interaction.


Good point. You were talkin about risks in other post.

They should lower the risks for newbies. This game has a bad rep.
Players are too scared of WH, losec and dogfighting, take away some of
the risks of losing it all (panicbutton).

Should be more opportunities for soloplayers. Would lure more "mature"
players with time and money on their hands.

If you always stay ready you don't have to get ready.
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#316 - 2017-03-17 23:22:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Rroff
Teckos Pech wrote:

No, the mechanics are the environment. See here:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6875713#post6875713

Quote:
For example, If I put 700 million ISK work of cargo into my tanked freighter and use a scout and manually pilot I'll likely be fine. On the other hand if I were to put 7 billion into an anti-tanked freighter and not use a scout my actions have caused me to face considerably more risk. Note in both instances the game environment is the same, but it is my actions that dictate the level of risk I am taking on.


And why is a pilot mining in a retriever when they can mine a procurer. A procurer can fit a pretty massive tank so that it will take several catalysts to burn you down, at least 4 maybe 5 or 6. And how many miners are ganked while watching Netflix or the like? Again player actions. Choosing a retriever, a very gankable ship. Fitting it with not tank. Watching Netflix. All imprudent actions I’m afraid.

Actions are what make a difference. For the suicide ganker he is taking actions to minimize his risk. He uses a fast aligning ship, he uses safe spots, he uses citadels, he uses cheap ships. He is using the environment to his best advantage whereas their targets, generally, are not.

Edit: Christ I feel like I'm having the same conversation over and over again...some EVE version of Ground Hog Day.


None of my argument is about people piloting freighters and getting ganked - I'm not disagreeing with any of those arguments at all - I take a lot of precautions using blockade runners, etc. and if people haven't learnt how to minimise the risks by the time they are able to fly those kind of ships then I have little sympathy for them and there simply is no helping them.

I'm talking about a very demonstrable loss of potential subscribers as new players which could possibly be avoided and with the trend of a declining player base it isn't something that should be trivially dismissed. I'm not saying here that every or a large number are not turning into long term subscribers due to this but at the same time atleast my experience suggests it isn't an insignificant number.

You are focusing way too much on specifics related to my argument than seeing the whole argument in broad strokes for what it is hence this is likely to go around and around :s at the end of the day someone using an alt to gank an inexperienced player can be almost if not entirely immune to repercussions by doing very little themselves the balance of the game is steeply in the ganker's favour and only those who like picking on targets that are unable to fight back would defend against measures that would make it a bit more equal.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#317 - 2017-03-17 23:23:22 UTC
Trasch Taranogas wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:


The length of skill training is for game balance. Imagine if everyone started out able to do hacking right out of the gate. You'd find nothing worth exploring. Older more experienced players would be out there getting all the goodies first with an alt. And even if you did find something good, all those people doing exploration would crash the market.

Probably the best thing for player retention is player-on-player interaction. Players who do not interact with other players leave the game the soonest and that includes ship-to-ship combat as one form of interaction.


Good point. You were talkin about risks in other post.

They should lower the risks for newbies. This game has a bad rep.
Players are too scared of WH, losec and dogfighting, take away some of
the risks of losing it all (panicbutton).

Should be more opportunities for soloplayers. Would lure more "mature"
players with time and money on their hands.


New players need to learn how to lower their own risk. Oh, and according to CCP new players are suicide ganked with a probability of about 1%. So suicide ganking is not a big problem for them. They might get caught up in a wardec if the join a player run corp early on, but the veterans there should be helping them learn how to manage that risk...and if they aren't then the new guy needs to find a better corp.

Solo play is probably counter indicated given that player interaction is important for player retention.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A92Ge2S8M1Y

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Trasch Taranogas
State War Academy
Caldari State
#318 - 2017-03-17 23:24:07 UTC
Meh, knowing the playerbase a panicbutton is not good.

Maan that would be exploited. How about a "drop your cargo
save your ship"-button?

Then you have a choice, fight til the bitter end or get away with your awesome ship.

If you always stay ready you don't have to get ready.
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#319 - 2017-03-17 23:30:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Rroff
Teckos Pech wrote:
Oh, and according to CCP new players are suicide ganked with a probability of about 1%. So suicide ganking is not a big problem for them.


Honestly I find CCP's statistics somewhat romanticised to fit the narration they want to tell - while I'm not suggesting like 60% of all new players face it or something I'm fairly certain it is a bigger factor than that. Sometime around 2014-2015 I was involved in around 10 people trying the game, some I know IRL and some from another forum and atleast 3 of them were suicide ganked a couple of them repeatedly in the first few weeks of playing. Around that time I was working IRL with a bunch of guys that were either in IRC or corps with ties to them who also confirmed a similar story with people they had tried to get into the game.
Trasch Taranogas
State War Academy
Caldari State
#320 - 2017-03-17 23:36:27 UTC
-Confidence
-Progress
-Purpose
-Excitement

Confidence is the worst part. You are fumbling in the dark for a
long, long time as newbie.

Progress and purpose could easily be sped up with ships
and tweaks to combat, flying.

Excitement, a hard one. Can a game please everyone, a few
or none?

If you always stay ready you don't have to get ready.