These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Assembly Hall

 
 

Why Eve Can't attract new players, and has lost 20,000 so far.

First post
Author
CODE.
#261 - 2017-03-08 07:43:36 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
So according to you its both extremely hard to set up a gank and only foolish over loaders of cargo get ganked AND at the same time gankers gank empty freighters out of boredom. Also in LaLaLand single pilots multibox freighter ganks not because its easy but because they are amazing and your fleets with 15 to 80 players depending on sec status still find it extremely taxing.


There are only a couple of people who are even able to multibox ganks on the level that you are able to gank freighters. Also that multiboxing has limits and even Kusion can't gank properly tanked freighters, you need a fleet of people.

It's not really an argument to just call it "easy" just because "someone" is able to do it. Especially if it is pretty obvious that only a handful of player in the entire game is able to do it at all while for everyone else it is completely out of reach.

The reason why you do it anyway is quite clear. It is well known that you are in favour of completely removing non-consensual PvP from Highsec and you somehow think to label the profession as easy without showing any evidence will convince someone it is in need of more nerfs.

Infinity Ziona wrote:
Time to get back to reality. Anything that can be multiboxed by a single player is trivial for a fleet.


Fleet PvP and solo PvP are two completely different things. The game mechanics are the same, but the real challenge of a fleet is not the game mechanics or the difficulty of a certain job, but the people skills of the FC which has to hold it all together and coordinate the other players. This is far from trivial and only a hand full of people are really good at it.
Goonswarm Federation
#262 - 2017-03-08 08:10:39 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:


So according to you its both extremely hard to set up a gank and only foolish over loaders of cargo get ganked AND at the same time gankers gank empty freighters out of boredom. Also in LaLaLand single pilots multibox freighter ganks not because its easy but because they are amazing and your fleets with 15 to 80 players depending on sec status still find it extremely taxing.

Time to get back to reality. Anything that can be multiboxed by a single player is trivial for a fleet.


What empty freighters? Aside from Burn events where are we seeing this? You keep saying this, but I don't see much evidence of it.

"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

Caldari State
#263 - 2017-03-17 04:19:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Sivar Ahishatsu
Ms GoodyMaker wrote:
Eve has lost over 20 thousand players in the years I have played this game, and it is sad to see.
The player base continues to tell CCP that the one thing that drives players away the most is CCP continuing to allow players to suicide kill other players in empire space, with little to no ramifications for their actions, while the players they kill take huge losses.

No one will continue to play under such circumstances, and the drop in population shows it.

Take CCPs position allowing suicide ganking in empire to continue to it's natural conclusion; no one will bother to contribute to the economy because it would just be destroyed, and everyone would sit around and suicide gank each other until there is nothing left.

All CCP has to do is disable people from being able to fire on each other in empire space without a war dec. Very simple, they already have the mechanic in the game - bombs don't work in empire, capitals can't jump to empire, etc. CCP, if you want to attract people to play this game, create a safe space for people to learn and play in safety, and then move out to null sec or take part in war decs when they are ready.

Dust514 is shutting down, your Valkyrie product is not going to have a good reputation either, when your preceeding product is hated by most of the gaming community.

Will the Council try to get across to CCP that the on going state of Eve-Online is glorified gang warfare, disgusting to all civilized people, and must change as outlined above, to continue to survive.

Times have changed, Eve-Online has to change to, or die.


Hmm, I find it a bit too drastic. It would effectively make Empire space (I am assuming from 1.0 to 0.1 here) consensual PvP... it would be EVE's Trammel in a way...

The idea has some merit, in that it has worked in some other games, but still, I prefer deterrence and self-policing than outright prevention...

Of course this solution here would be the easiest to implement for CCP.

I do agree that the "slap in the face" mechanics and the weak Security system in place is a deterrent to players playing the game at this time. And this situation needs to be turned around for sure..if anyone really cares about EVE that is...
Goonswarm Federation
#264 - 2017-03-17 04:29:33 UTC
Sivar Ahishatsu wrote:
Ms GoodyMaker wrote:
Eve has lost over 20 thousand players in the years I have played this game, and it is sad to see.
The player base continues to tell CCP that the one thing that drives players away the most is CCP continuing to allow players to suicide kill other players in empire space, with little to no ramifications for their actions, while the players they kill take huge losses.

No one will continue to play under such circumstances, and the drop in population shows it.

Take CCPs position allowing suicide ganking in empire to continue to it's natural conclusion; no one will bother to contribute to the economy because it would just be destroyed, and everyone would sit around and suicide gank each other until there is nothing left.

All CCP has to do is disable people from being able to fire on each other in empire space without a war dec. Very simple, they already have the mechanic in the game - bombs don't work in empire, capitals can't jump to empire, etc. CCP, if you want to attract people to play this game, create a safe space for people to learn and play in safety, and then move out to null sec or take part in war decs when they are ready.

Dust514 is shutting down, your Valkyrie product is not going to have a good reputation either, when your preceeding product is hated by most of the gaming community.

Will the Council try to get across to CCP that the on going state of Eve-Online is glorified gang warfare, disgusting to all civilized people, and must change as outlined above, to continue to survive.

Times have changed, Eve-Online has to change to, or die.


Hmm, I find it a bit too drastic. It would effectively make Empire space (I am assuming from 1.0 to 0.1 here) consensual PvP... it would be EVE's Trammel in a way...

The idea has some merit, in that it has worked in some other games, but still, I prefer deterrence and self-policing than outright prevention...

Of course this solution here would be the easiest to implement for CCP.

I do agree that the "slap in the face" mechanics and the weak Security system in place is a deterrent to players playing the game at this time. And this situation needs to be turned around for sure..if anyone really cares about EVE that is...


Roll

How much stuff moves around HS vs. is ganked or killed in a wardc? How many players move around HS vs. being ganked or killed in a wardec?

"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

Caldari State
#265 - 2017-03-17 04:40:28 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Sivar Ahishatsu wrote:
Ms GoodyMaker wrote:
Eve has lost over 20 thousand players in the years I have played this game, and it is sad to see.
The player base continues to tell CCP that the one thing that drives players away the most is CCP continuing to allow players to suicide kill other players in empire space, with little to no ramifications for their actions, while the players they kill take huge losses.

No one will continue to play under such circumstances, and the drop in population shows it.

Take CCPs position allowing suicide ganking in empire to continue to it's natural conclusion; no one will bother to contribute to the economy because it would just be destroyed, and everyone would sit around and suicide gank each other until there is nothing left.

All CCP has to do is disable people from being able to fire on each other in empire space without a war dec. Very simple, they already have the mechanic in the game - bombs don't work in empire, capitals can't jump to empire, etc. CCP, if you want to attract people to play this game, create a safe space for people to learn and play in safety, and then move out to null sec or take part in war decs when they are ready.

Dust514 is shutting down, your Valkyrie product is not going to have a good reputation either, when your preceeding product is hated by most of the gaming community.

Will the Council try to get across to CCP that the on going state of Eve-Online is glorified gang warfare, disgusting to all civilized people, and must change as outlined above, to continue to survive.

Times have changed, Eve-Online has to change to, or die.


Hmm, I find it a bit too drastic. It would effectively make Empire space (I am assuming from 1.0 to 0.1 here) consensual PvP... it would be EVE's Trammel in a way...

The idea has some merit, in that it has worked in some other games, but still, I prefer deterrence and self-policing than outright prevention...

Of course this solution here would be the easiest to implement for CCP.

I do agree that the "slap in the face" mechanics and the weak Security system in place is a deterrent to players playing the game at this time. And this situation needs to be turned around for sure..if anyone really cares about EVE that is...


Roll

How much stuff moves around HS vs. is ganked or killed in a wardc? How many players move around HS vs. being ganked or killed in a wardec?


Not sure I understand your question. What do you mean?
Goonswarm Federation
#266 - 2017-03-17 05:00:14 UTC
Sivar Ahishatsu wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:


Roll

How much stuff moves around HS vs. is ganked or killed in a wardc? How many players move around HS vs. being ganked or killed in a wardec?


Not sure I understand your question. What do you mean?


Most players move around HS unmolested. Most haulers move around HS unmolested. In fact, I'd say tens of trillions move around for every trillion that died in a gank or a war dec over the course of a month. That is HS PvP is not some overwhelming ubiquitous thing that is stifling game play.

But we see or hear about those who get killed because we keep track of them via killboards like zkill. So you are reacting to what you see, but ignoring what you can't see (or see so easily). Go sit in Uedama and watch how many freighters go through without a problem. Do it for an hour. My guess is you'll be surprised.

"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

Caldari State
#267 - 2017-03-17 05:51:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Sivar Ahishatsu
Teckos Pech wrote:
Sivar Ahishatsu wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:


Roll

How much stuff moves around HS vs. is ganked or killed in a wardc? How many players move around HS vs. being ganked or killed in a wardec?


Not sure I understand your question. What do you mean?


Most players move around HS unmolested. Most haulers move around HS unmolested. In fact, I'd say tens of trillions move around for every trillion that died in a gank or a war dec over the course of a month. That is HS PvP is not some overwhelming ubiquitous thing that is stifling game play.

But we see or hear about those who get killed because we keep track of them via killboards like zkill. So you are reacting to what you see, but ignoring what you can't see (or see so easily). Go sit in Uedama and watch how many freighters go through without a problem. Do it for an hour. My guess is you'll be surprised.


I see, thanks for explaining so it is a statistical point of view you are expressing.

Yet there is a psychological effect here to consider. This is no different than someone getting attacked by a shark in a crowded beach. Many people will be deterred from going to that beach thereafter anyways regardless of the statistics.

I mean, if I come and tell yo there is a great white that killed someone here yesterday, would you go swimming even if you know that it is the only attack in the past 6 months?

Rationally and emotionally would you?

And that is just one aspect of all this.

the second question to ask, is why is it wrong that several haulers make it past in Uedana?

I mean, do you start killing truckers in the street because too many trucks get to pass by every day? You would be considered a murderer and a criminal if you did that.

This kind of behaviour is what is loathed.

Everyone can understand on the other hand Warfare.You want to prevent a competitor corp from making their deliveries and hamper them in the market, that is why Wars are there, Make war and fight it out ambush their Haulers etc etc.

But the average new developing player is not after conquering the market, cornering the market or competing with industrial copr's profits. The average player that comes to play EVE is a Sci-Fi enthusiast, seeking an experience in Space, to explore it, to trade in it to mine in it, not necessarily for grand profit but for the enjoyment of doing these activities. Yes there are people who enjoy mining as weird as that may sound to some. And not everyone comes to play eve with the intent to do combat and murder other people's character and pop other people's ships. Not everyone is aggressive like that or enjoys to be aggressive towards other players. And these people are shunned out of the game.

And It is human nature to want safety too. This is why we invented laws and peace enforcement. If we were all fine in living every day looking behind our shoulders in an anarchy we would not have laws, ethics, human rights and morals. We would all live like animals, eat or be eaten.

And it matters not if this is a game, the feeling of constant fear is not enjoyable to many people, who instead would just move on to play something else.

This is why it would be good, I think, that fear is considerably reduced from Empire space, let people have fun in it let people come out from it on their own accord according to their own realisations and thrill, and most importantly emergent ambitions!

There is nothing wrong with the game having a large Empire population which is enjoying itself according to what is enjoyable to it.

Don't you think?
Goonswarm Federation
#268 - 2017-03-17 06:00:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Sivar Ahishatsu wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Sivar Ahishatsu wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:


Roll

How much stuff moves around HS vs. is ganked or killed in a wardc? How many players move around HS vs. being ganked or killed in a wardec?


Not sure I understand your question. What do you mean?


Most players move around HS unmolested. Most haulers move around HS unmolested. In fact, I'd say tens of trillions move around for every trillion that died in a gank or a war dec over the course of a month. That is HS PvP is not some overwhelming ubiquitous thing that is stifling game play.

But we see or hear about those who get killed because we keep track of them via killboards like zkill. So you are reacting to what you see, but ignoring what you can't see (or see so easily). Go sit in Uedama and watch how many freighters go through without a problem. Do it for an hour. My guess is you'll be surprised.


I see, thanks for explaining so it is a statistical point of view you are expressing.

Yet there is a psychological effect here to consider. This is no different than someone getting attacked by a shark in a crowded beach. Many people will be deterred from going to that beach thereafter anyways regardless of the statistics.

I mean, if I come and tell yo there is a great white that killed someone here yesterday, would you go swimming even if you know that it is the only attack in the past 6 months?

Rationally and emotionally would you?

And that is just one aspect of all this.

the second question to ask, is why is it wrong that several haulers make it past in Uedana?

I mean, do you start killing truckers in the street because too many trucks get to pass by every day? You would be considered a murderer and a criminal if you did that.

This kind of behaviour is what is loathed.

Everyone can understand on the other hand Warfare.You want to prevent a competitor corp from making their deliveries and hamper them in the market, that is why Wars are there, Make war and fight it out ambush their Haulers etc etc.

But the average new developing player is not after conquering the market, cornering the market or competing with industrial copr's profits. The average player that comes to play EVE is a Sci-Fi enthusiast, seeking an experience in Space, to explore it, to trade in it to mine in it, not necessarily for grand profit but for the enjoyment of doing these activities. Yes there are people who enjoy mining as weird as that may sound to some. And not everyone comes to play eve with the intent to do combat and murder other people's character and pop other people's ships. Not everyone is aggressive like that or enjoys to be aggressive towards other players. And these people are shunned out of the game.

And It is human nature to want safety too. This is why we invented laws and peace enforcement. If we were all fine in living every day looking behind our shoulders in an anarchy we would not have laws, ethics, human rights and morals. We would all live like animals, eat or be eaten.

And it matters not if this is a game, the feeling of constant fear is not enjoyable to many people, who instead would just move on to play something else.

This is why it would be good, I think, that fear is considerably reduced from Empire space, let people have fun in it let people come out from it on their own accord according to their own realisations and thrill.

There is nothing wrong with the game having a large Empire population which is enjoying itself according to what is enjoyable to it.

Don't you think?


The shark analogy is interesting in that it depends on the behavior of the shark. If it sticks around and is territorial no. That would be foolish and imprudent....and most people who are ganked are imprudent and foolish.

Similarly if you undock your freighter and there is a war dec you are being very imprudent and foolish.

Using your analogy not only was there a shark attack...you can still see the shark swimming around and yet go in the water anyways.

You must keep in mind that risk is not something that the game comes along and imposes on you out of the blue. Chances are if you find yourself in a very risky situation it is because you did something to "bring" that risk down on you. If you look at freighter suicide ganks (i.e. excluding war decs) for example most of them have way too much cargo value. Even the ones that have low cargo value you should check to see if they have a double wrapped courier package. Those often get ganked based on the premise: if they double wrapped it, it must be valuable. In other words, these players took actions that increased their risk.

Edit:

The takeaway is this: be prudent and your risk of a suicide gank is actually quite small. In a war dec again the idea is prudence. Do not undock in your marauder or whatever expensive ship you have. In times of war dec it is even more important to follow EVE's number one rule: do not fly anything you cannot afford to lose.

So if you are prudent and learn the game mechanics you'll be quite safe in HS. You won't be 100% safe. But all you have to do is be faster than the other guy when the bear is chasing you. The new player will have to learn this and the best way is by doing it...learning by doing. Trial and error...and flying ships you can afford to replace.

"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

Caldari State
#269 - 2017-03-17 06:25:37 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
[

You must keep in mind that risk is not something that the game comes along and imposes on you out of the blue. Chances are if you find yourself in a very risky situation it is because you did something to "bring" that risk down on you. If you look at freighter suicide ganks (i.e. excluding war decs) for example most of them have way too much cargo value. Even the ones that have low cargo value you should check to see if they have a double wrapped courier package. Those often get ganked based on the premise: if they double wrapped it, it must be valuable. In other words, these players took actions that increased their risk.


Actually yes the game does impose risk. Because the game decides what is possible and what is not. Not the players.

Tell me what is wrong with a guy on a Covetor mining in an Ice field in High Sec, and suddenly having a Catalyst blowing it up without any kind of provocation? Yes a minute later the Catalyst was dead by Concord...too late though for the Covetor.

Who faulted here?

I cannot blame the Miner for mining. Did he really do a mistake? For what? Wanting to log on to a game and having some fun?

We could try to blame the Killer but that would not solve anything ..

The issue is the game's systems, which made it possible for the Attacker to attack.

It causes everything else mentioned above,to continue upon the shark analogy, EVE empire space is like a Resort in a tropical island inviting people to have fun surfing while not having a fence in place to protect them from shark attacks

As for the example of the double wrapped courier package, who decided that people should not transport these? It seems all very arbitrary to me and not in a good way.

And again the games system permit you to decide that so and so should not be transporting what they want to and that they should be attacked for the apparent value in their hold.

This is a problem...from one side the game provides tools for transport and mechanics for packages and form the other lets thugs punish people for wanting to have fun.

Don't you see that in the long run this is detrimental to the game itself. Because the Hauler has two choices really. One is to turn in to a thug themselves and give up hauling or simply go play something else and be totally indifferent to you like if you never existed and matter not.

People say "your not obligated to play the game", and I agree, it is true, I am not. if I think that the game is unfun, I can quit it no opne can force me to stay, the game goes in the garbage and gets a bad reputation and you become nothing, and the aggressor here becomes nothing, just a whisper in the wind for whom Ia m totally indifferent about.

Is that what you want? People to throw EVE in the garbage and consider its player community insignificant and meaningless?

It is only a matter of time before you find yourself alone in a shrinking game community...

There are many mechanics in the game already for Aggression, Faction Wars, Corp Wars, Nulsec Wars Wormhole Wars, if action is what you seek take your pick it is all there! No need to go after the new players, the weak players or the unnamed ones...

I dont understand what would be lost by having a safer more just Empire space where crime is deterred and discouraged...I can only see what the game and its community would win with such a setup.
#270 - 2017-03-17 06:42:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Black Pedro
Teckos Pech wrote:
Most players move around HS unmolested. Most haulers move around HS unmolested. In fact, I'd say tens of trillions move around for every trillion that died in a gank or a war dec over the course of a month. That is HS PvP is not some overwhelming ubiquitous thing that is stifling game play.
No Teckos, you are wrong. It is closer to 500T or 1 000T ISK that move around highsec for every 1T that is lost in highsec, not 10T ISK. This is according to CCP Quant's numbers. For example, last month 1 917 T ISK worth of goods moved in or out of The Forge while only 2.69 T ISK (0.14%) was destroyed. In Domain, it was 1 299 T ISK transported and only 1.44 T ISK (0.11%) lost. And those destruction numbers are losses due to all things, including NPCs, not just wars and criminals.

Highsec is incredibly safe as a whole. By any objective or subjective criteria the chances of you losing something are minuscule in almost every situation. I get that for whatever reason, some carebears have convinced themselves that highsec is a warzone where there is a ganker or wardeccer behind every asteroid, but it really isn't the case. Those crime numbers would be the envy of any jurisdiction and show how much the mechanics favour the highsec denizen over the aggressor.

Now I also get that those losses probably disproportionately fall on the newer players. Once players figure out the mechanics, the only way to lose something in highsec is to be incredibly unlucky, or become complacent or greedy/imprudent. Most of those economic numbers reflect veteran players operating in near complete safely and with impunity to attackers, while the losses fall to those with less understanding of the game mechanics (or the just bad/lazy/greedy). That is however, how a competitive game is suppose to work.

I am not sure how CCP can ever reconcile the fact that some players find losing stuff "non-consensually" a 'slap in the face' (or worse, even just the chance they could lose their stuff) with the fact Eve Online is a full-time, PvP sandbox game where you consent to PvP when you undock. That will indeed turn off some players. Even after they have nerfed piracy to near zero in highsec, and made wardecs completely consensual for the individual player, there are still players who won't accept any risk that they will lose their stuff no matter how lazily they play the game, or that it is not possible to be 100% safe no matter how much effort they make to be left alone. These players are just simply playing the wrong game. They won't be happy no matter what CCP does short of Trammelizing the game.

I don't think CCP can or will nerf highsec risk much more. We are pretty much at peak safety. Heh, maybe I am wrong on that as I thought that last week and then CCP came up with the insta-PLEX travel hanger. I wonder if the PCU will track lower after this anti-content safety buff like it seems to have with all the others? I mean, I think this hanger probably is a good idea for new players and maybe thus overall, but it will come at yet another cost to player activity in the game by removing a profession (PLEX hauler) and some player-driven stories over large losses in PLEX that drove interest and engagement with the game. I guess time will tell.

It would be nice if CCP actually added something to the game to create content and activity instead of just deleting conflict drivers and making things safer and safer as seems to have preferred development activity over the last 5-7 years. Such content drivers might actually turn around the falling player numbers.
Goonswarm Federation
#271 - 2017-03-17 06:49:09 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Most players move around HS unmolested. Most haulers move around HS unmolested. In fact, I'd say tens of trillions move around for every trillion that died in a gank or a war dec over the course of a month. That is HS PvP is not some overwhelming ubiquitous thing that is stifling game play.
No Teckos, you are wrong. It is closer to 500T or 1 000T ISK that move around highsec for every 1T that is lost in highsec, not 10T ISK. This is according to CCP Quant's numbers. For example, last month 1 917 T ISK worth of goods moved in or out of The Forge while only 2.69 T ISK (0.14%) was destroyed. In Domain, it was 1 299 T ISK was transported and only 1.44 T ISK (0.11%) lost. And those destruction numbers are losses due to all things, including NPCs, not just wars and criminals.

Highsec is incredibly safe as a whole. By any objective or subjective criteria the chances of you losing something are minuscule in almost every situation. I get that for whatever reason, some carebears have convinced themselves that highsec is a warzone where there is a ganker or wardeccer behind every asteroid, but it really isn't the case. Those crime numbers would be the envy of any jurisdiction and show how much the mechanics favour the highsec denizen over the aggressor.

Now I also get that those losses probably disproportionately fall on the newer players. Once players figure out the mechanics, the only way to lose something in highsec is to be incredibly unlucky, or become complacent or greedy/imprudent. Most of those economic numbers reflect veteran players operating in near complete safely and with impunity to attackers, while the losses fall to with less understanding of the game mechanics (or the just bad/lazy/greedy). That is however, how a competitive game is suppose to work.

I am not sure how CCP can ever reconcile the fact that some players find losing stuff "non-consensually" a 'slap in the face' (or worse, even just the chance they could lose their stuff) with the fact Eve Online is a full-time, PvP sandbox game where you consent to PvP when you undock. That will indeed turn off some players. Even after they have nerfed piracy to near zero in highsec, and made wardecs completely consensual for the individual player, there are still players who won't accept any risk that they will lose their stuff no matter how lazily they play the game, or how much effort they make to be left alone. These players are just simply playing the wrong game. They won't be happy no matter what CCP does short of Trammelizing the game.

I don't think you CCP can or will nerf highsec much more. We are pretty much at peak safety. Heh, maybe I am wrong on that as I thought that last week and then CCP came up with the insta-PLEX travel hanger. I wonder if the PCU will track lower after this anti-content safety buff like it seems to have with all the others? I mean, I think this hanger probably is a good idea for new players and maybe thus overall, but it will come at yet another cost to player activity in the game by removing a profession (PLEX hauler) and some player-driven stories over large losses in PLEX that drove interest and engagement with the game. I guess time will tell.

It would be nice if CCP actually added something to the game to create content and activity instead of just deleting conflict drivers and making things safer and safer as seems to have preferred development activity over the last 5-7 years. Such content drivers might actually turn around the falling player numbers.


I stand corrected (I thought it might be more than that, but was too lazy to look).

And completely agreed with that final paragraph.

"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

Goonswarm Federation
#272 - 2017-03-17 06:55:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Sivar Ahishatsu wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:

You must keep in mind that risk is not something that the game comes along and imposes on you out of the blue. Chances are if you find yourself in a very risky situation it is because you did something to "bring" that risk down on you. If you look at freighter suicide ganks (i.e. excluding war decs) for example most of them have way too much cargo value. Even the ones that have low cargo value you should check to see if they have a double wrapped courier package. Those often get ganked based on the premise: if they double wrapped it, it must be valuable. In other words, these players took actions that increased their risk.


Actually yes the game does impose risk. Because the game decides what is possible and what is not. Not the players.


No. That is creating the environment we play in. Yes, CCP made it possible to suicide gank other players in HS. They also made it harder to kill players than in LS and especially NS. But that is not "risk". Risk is based almost entirely on the player's actions.

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.

Risk is a function of player actions. Behave imprudently and you'll have more risk. Behave prudently you'll have lower risk.

Edit: And using your mining barge example. The miner made choices that affected his risk. He went for a covetor when he could have gone for a procuror with a solid tank. The former is easy to gank solo, the latter cannot be ganked solo.

Choices...this game is all about choices.

"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

Goonswarm Federation
#273 - 2017-03-17 07:13:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
And see Black Pedro's post above. Huge amounts of ISK value moves around the game. Absolutely huge. To put this in perspective lets convert those ISK amounts into US dollar amounts via PLEX prices in game and out of game.

So 1,917 trillion ISK converts to $32,940,698. Lets just call it $33 million.*

How much was destroyed, well 2.96 trillion ISK or only a paltry $50,863. And lets call if $51 thousand.

For this kind of thing to happen I am going to make a wild and bat **** crazy claim:

HS must be very, very, very safe for people to move that kind of ISK value around with so little destroyed. The actual risk is tiny.

*The calculations:

Divide 1,917,000,000,000,000 by 1,161,000,000 the latter being the current cost of a PLEX in Jita.

That yields a number of 1,651,163 which when you multiply it by the OOG cost of a PLEX, 19.95, we get $32,940,698.

Edit:

To further support my contention that HS is quite safe, go look at CCP Quant's numbers and in particular look at the NS regions and the amount of ISK value moving around. It is very small by comparison. Why? Maybe because it is dangerous to move around in NS. Putting 500 million ISK into a tanked obelisk and using a scout you'll be be able to move around HS without minimal fear of a gank. Go try that in NS and let me know how it works out for you. Do it everyday for a month.

"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

Gallente Federation
#274 - 2017-03-20 21:11:55 UTC
What does that matter to a new player? In regards to the OP.

They see a Twitch/YouTube vid, or they see EVE is free on steam. (I would wager most new folk passing through EVE's doors lately come from steam, followed closely by accidentally stumbling on media news.)

They don't know anyone and they have a small idea what EVE entails. It's in space. It's a sandbox...ooooh.

They are unlikely to have any concept of any in game value, Or what High sec or low sec is. They don't yet know of the great data wizard CCP Quant.

They choose Gallente apparently because of the soon to be removed empire lore text 'The only true democracy in New Eden'

They do the NPE and think, ooooh this is pretty, this is actually jolly good fun, I might play this.

They look at the sub fee to go OMEGA POWER! ...Then ask in rookie or starter corp "Can a new player get a PLEX in a month" OR "What do I need to do to make enough for a PLEX each month" ...common theme.

"Missions" someone says, "work up to lvl 4's" ...will take time, and skill points... "Exploration" another says, but they can't scan anything good down and when they do someone else jumps in, nails the site and leaves... "Join a Null sec corp" another announces, "Can make all the monies and win at eve." but, "Don't trust anyone" and, "Don't fly what you can't afford to loose!" "Wormholes" someone bellows, "Ninja Gas clouds" "bookmark the entrance" "Don't talk in local" "Warp out right away if you see sleepers, or anyone else"

...sleepers, gas clouds, bookmarks... er...

They think about it, about all the options available to them in this darkly oppressive alternate reality... and go mining. In high sec.

They get ganked.

They realize, with a cold shiver, they have no control over their stuff. At any moment anything they have worked towards can be violently taken away. That in effect, the time they put into the game has no value, and as such appears unvalued by the very creators. That If they did sub, they would essentially be paying for this unwelcome outcome. Why bother investing any time at all in it?

They leave.

They directly leave, they don't pass GO. They simply go play another game, and they certainly don't bother filling in the why did you leave questionnaire. Thus providing CCP with zero useful feedback.

Goonswarm Federation
#275 - 2017-03-20 21:26:40 UTC
Erebus 'TheChin' Sundance wrote:
What does that matter to a new player? In regards to the OP.

They see a Twitch/YouTube vid, or they see EVE is free on steam. (I would wager most new folk passing through EVE's doors lately come from steam, followed closely by accidentally stumbling on media news.)

They don't know anyone and they have a small idea what EVE entails. It's in space. It's a sandbox...ooooh.

They are unlikely to have any concept of any in game value, Or what High sec or low sec is. They don't yet know of the great data wizard CCP Quant.

They choose Gallente apparently because of the soon to be removed empire lore text 'The only true democracy in New Eden'

They do the NPE and think, ooooh this is pretty, this is actually jolly good fun, I might play this.

They look at the sub fee to go OMEGA POWER! ...Then ask in rookie or starter corp "Can a new player get a PLEX in a month" OR "What do I need to do to make enough for a PLEX each month" ...common theme.

"Missions" someone says, "work up to lvl 4's" ...will take time, and skill points... "Exploration" another says, but they can't scan anything good down and when they do someone else jumps in, nails the site and leaves... "Join a Null sec corp" another announces, "Can make all the monies and win at eve." but, "Don't trust anyone" and, "Don't fly what you can't afford to loose!" "Wormholes" someone bellows, "Ninja Gas clouds" "bookmark the entrance" "Don't talk in local" "Warp out right away if you see sleepers, or anyone else"

...sleepers, gas clouds, bookmarks... er...

They think about it, about all the options available to them in this darkly oppressive alternate reality... and go mining. In high sec.

They get ganked.

They realize, with a cold shiver, they have no control over their stuff. At any moment anything they have worked towards can be violently taken away. That in effect, the time they put into the game has no value, and as such appears unvalued by the very creators. That If they did sub, they would essentially be paying for this unwelcome outcome. Why bother investing any time at all in it?

They leave.

They directly leave, they don't pass GO. They simply go play another game, and they certainly don't bother filling in the why did you leave questionnaire. Thus providing CCP with zero useful feedback.



Oh for God's sake. Roll

Tell you what, next time a new player comes along we'll send him to you so you can hold his hand and pat his poo-poo.

And if a new player is leaving because he can't earn a PLEX...that is an incredibly stupid argument. What do you think it would take so any old new player could earn a PLEX in a few days or 2-3 weeks after joining the game.

Here: Any new player who is thinking about buying PLEX in game wildly unrealistic expectations. Oh, I'll earn a PLEX every month so I can "play for free" by grinding hours of my free time...to "play for free". He'd quit anyways out of the sheer horror of spending all his free time grinding.

In fact I'll offer this alternative conjecture about PLEX; the people who largely buy PLEX and "play for free" are more than likely people who have been playing awhile and have developed in-game income streams/wealth that let them do this. Some PLEX are bought as a store of value (although with deflation going on right now, this need is reduced IMO). Those selling PLEX are by and large the new players who want ISK without the grind. That is PLEX are most likely filling a redistributive role in-game. Shifting ISK from those who have it to those who do not. This is a good thing. ISK sitting in Player X's wallet is doing nothing. PLEX going into New Guys wallet will likely be quickly spent and put back into some degree of circulation. Further, it weakens the market for illegal ISK purchases.

All this focus on "how can a new player get a PLEX" is just simply moronic. New players do get PLEX...for sale so they can get ISK.

"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

#276 - 2017-03-21 12:38:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Black Pedro
Erebus 'TheChin' Sundance wrote:
They think about it, about all the options available to them in this darkly oppressive alternate reality... and go mining. In high sec.

They get ganked.

They realize, with a cold shiver, they have no control over their stuff. At any moment anything they have worked towards can be violently taken away. That in effect, the time they put into the game has no value, and as such appears unvalued by the very creators. That If they did sub, they would essentially be paying for this unwelcome outcome. Why bother investing any time at all in it?

They leave.

They directly leave, they don't pass GO. They simply go play another game, and they certainly don't bother filling in the why did you leave questionnaire. Thus providing CCP with zero useful feedback.

I love this narrative. It is like a ghost story told around the camp fire, or an urban legend that is passed from one generation of teenagers in town to the next based on no evidence or on no facts. It sounds plausible and resonates emotionally with Eve players, yet completely misses the big picture.

Ok here is my version of the tale, likely much more reflective of the average gamer who attempts Eve:

"They think about all the exciting options in this dystopian, war-torn universe CCP has built and they decide they first need to to gather some resources and perhaps train some skills before they head out on their exciting adventure... so they go mining. In highsec.

They mine for some days in a silent belt in highsec... and nothing happens. They keep going, perhaps upgrading their mining ship after a few weeks and still, nothing happens. Now they are getting a little antsy. The player-driven battles over space or industry they heard about are not apparent to them so they start to question why they are spending so many hours staring at a mining laser for no real reason. Perhaps at this point they just stop logging in, or maybe they switch to missioning as at least here there are some explosions.

Now a few months later, they are sitting in their Raven still having no interactions with the greater sandbox then other perhaps selling/buying a few things on the market, and finally it dawns on them: Eve is a terribly boring game. They gave it a try, but nothing happened. No opponent materialized and no greater goal appeared to them. They spent months playing but saw no massive fleet fights nor any of the machinations of the industrialist of New Eden for control of the markets. Just a few other silent miners in the belts, and spent a lot of time interacting with repetitive NPC agents. Why bother wasting any more time or money on this snoozefest?

They leave.

They directly leave, they don't pass GO. They don't come to the forums and whine about how they were ganked, or how unfair the game is. They simply leave for another game more interesting than Eve's current highsec solo experience. The only evidence of their presence and their weeks and months of boredom is buried deep in the game logs, found only when someone like CCP Rise or CCP Quant goes looking."

I am sure a handful of people have left the game after being ganked and not bothered to fill out the questionnaire. But I am convinced that the sterile and lifeless place much of highsec has become has bored many-fold more potential Eve players out of the game, many of whom also leave quietly, or perhaps even tell CCP their game is "boring". Probably most of them wouldn't even articulate it as such, and just attribute their inability to get into the game as something wrong or incompatible with them, even though they just never found the more exciting or fun bits that they might have really enjoyed. Really though, the problem is showing these new players the real potential of the game through the backdrop of an overly safe and unrepresentative-of-the-rest-of-the-game place like highsec.

Eve Online is a complex and unique game that will always have trouble getting players engaged with the full game. However, making highsec completely safe would not do anything to help the game long-term. As CCP Rise said:

"We have tried and tried to validate the myth that griefing has a pronounced affect on new players - we have failed... Isolating players away from the actual sandbox seems very contrary to what we would like to accomplish."

Yes, you can lose stuff in New Eden. But it is so, so, so much easier to make stuff in modern Eve Online that in almost any situation losses are inconsequential, even for new players. If you cannot handle losing a fraction of a percent of your net worth under any circumstance however, Eve Online might not be the game for you.
Caldari State
#277 - 2017-03-22 01:11:08 UTC
Erebus 'TheChin' Sundance wrote:
What does that matter to a new player? In regards to the OP.

They see a Twitch/YouTube vid, or they see EVE is free on steam. (I would wager most new folk passing through EVE's doors lately come from steam, followed closely by accidentally stumbling on media news.)

They don't know anyone and they have a small idea what EVE entails. It's in space. It's a sandbox...ooooh.

They are unlikely to have any concept of any in game value, Or what High sec or low sec is. They don't yet know of the great data wizard CCP Quant.

They choose Gallente apparently because of the soon to be removed empire lore text 'The only true democracy in New Eden'

They do the NPE and think, ooooh this is pretty, this is actually jolly good fun, I might play this.

They look at the sub fee to go OMEGA POWER! ...Then ask in rookie or starter corp "Can a new player get a PLEX in a month" OR "What do I need to do to make enough for a PLEX each month" ...common theme.

"Missions" someone says, "work up to lvl 4's" ...will take time, and skill points... "Exploration" another says, but they can't scan anything good down and when they do someone else jumps in, nails the site and leaves... "Join a Null sec corp" another announces, "Can make all the monies and win at eve." but, "Don't trust anyone" and, "Don't fly what you can't afford to loose!" "Wormholes" someone bellows, "Ninja Gas clouds" "bookmark the entrance" "Don't talk in local" "Warp out right away if you see sleepers, or anyone else"

...sleepers, gas clouds, bookmarks... er...

They think about it, about all the options available to them in this darkly oppressive alternate reality... and go mining. In high sec.

They get ganked.

They realise, with a cold shiver, they have no control over their stuff. At any moment anything they have worked towards can be violently taken away. That in effect, the time they put into the game has no value, and as such appears unvalued by the very creators. That If they did sub, they would essentially be paying for this unwelcome outcome. Why bother investing any time at all in it?

They leave.

They directly leave, they don't pass GO. They simply go play another game, and they certainly don't bother filling in the why did you leave questionnaire. Thus providing CCP with zero useful feedback.



This is actually very correct many players undergo the same.

Especially the last part about not giving feedback. Most players will not, They will indeed throw the game in the garbage bin and move on. The problem being the game.

Having said this there is also those who come in to the game fully aware of its realities but simply wanting to enjoy the other aspects of it sans too much PvP aggression or conflict. I mean the occasional suicide gank etc is acceptable, it is part of the reality of the game. But one can still enjoy it through some missions still enjoy various "Careers" between security distribution, mining and research. Small scale industry can be fun as well.

The issue here is of a different nature. people who are not interested too much in PvP aggression and conflict are limited in how far they can have fun in the game.

And in the long terms the game does become boring under that limitation. Someone said I do not remember in which thread that CCP made some statistic and found out that people who were ganked were more likely to stay in game that those that haven't.

I say this maybe so, I would not dispute the factual statistic, but I am disputing the interpretation of them. The people who stay after being ganked did so because the gank gave them anew area to explore of the game many of then most probably wanted to learn how to fight themselves and it was a change of pace and added more time to their enjoyment. But the people who were not ganked and quit did not leave because they did not get ganked, they left because the game is boring in HIGH sec in the long run if you do not wish to PvP...

And I think the actual numbers were not given I seriously think that there were far more people who left than those who stayed.

The game may sport PvP, but it is still an MMORPG, and it has to be expected that it will attract people who do not wish to have fun with PvP and are looking to have fun in other areas. High Sec is the place they can have that fun, but it is limited and this limits their time in game too.

Expanding highsec to include more systems all the way to (in my opinion) 0.2 (with similar security punishment as 0.5) would in my opinion make it viable for many such players to stay in EVE much much longer, and heck even move to other areas of the game in their own pace and time too. It would definitely make EVE High Sec allot less boring since it will open the way to more mission opportunities mining and Industry for these players with a relative "protection"..(we all know EVE is not 100% safe anywhere).

Unfortunately, the vocal mob of the forums is of the mindset that everyone should PvP and any other opinion gets bombarded and burred alive with rhetoric of what they think and want the game should be like. All the while new players keep on quiting.
#278 - 2017-03-22 07:24:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Black Pedro
Sivar Ahishatsu wrote:
Expanding highsec to include more systems all the way to (in my opinion) 0.2 (with similar security punishment as 0.5) would in my opinion make it viable for many such players to stay in EVE much much longer, and heck even move to other areas of the game in their own pace and time too. It would definitely make EVE High Sec allot less boring since it will open the way to more mission opportunities mining and Industry for these players with a relative "protection"..(we all know EVE is not 100% safe anywhere).

Unfortunately, the vocal mob of the forums is of the mindset that everyone should PvP and any other opinion gets bombarded and burred alive with rhetoric of what they think and want the game should be like. All the while new players keep on quiting.

The most glaring problem with your idea is it is an obviously zero-sum change that would delete much of the space that thousands of players use every day. Why should CCP take away 75% of lowsec and give it to you? Don't you think that might have a negative impact on the players that do log in to fight and PvE in lowsec today? I mean, it's not like highsec is overcrowded. I make a point of visiting the more obscure corners of highsec and the vast majority of systems once you get away from the trade hubs have only a couple pilots in them at any time or are empty.

Further, have you ever entered lowsec? Aside from the faction warfare stuff, the general missions and mining gameplay is near identical to the rest of Empire space. Sure, you have level 5 and some higher end ore but it basically is the same as highsec. If you want to run missions or mine you already can perfectly well in highsec. I don't think slightly increasing the number of systems where players can mine or mission with CONCORD protection is going make anyone stay playing Eve much longer. The gameplay would be near identical and they can already do it in the 1200 or so systems in highsec. Removing most of lowsec as an accessible PvP space and home of Faction Warfare would cause people to leave however. It would seem to me if you really want that content, it would be better to ask CCP to add that content back to highsec than delete most of lowsec to give it to you.

I do find it amusing that you accuse others of "bombarding" you with rhetoric about how the game should work when it is you asking for radical changes to the game as it doesn't conform to your narrow view of how a PvP game should work. Many of us actually like Eve the way it is, as does CCP apparently. I am not sure where you get your hubris to tell everyone else how they should play or design an open-world PvP sandbox game. By all means, share what you are looking for in a game, but you also need to realize how and why Eve was designed this way, and that CCP has stuck with this vision for almost 15 years, and that it is an MMO that other people like to play in its current form.
CODE.
#279 - 2017-03-22 08:03:33 UTC
Sivar Ahishatsu wrote:

I say this maybe so, I would not dispute the factual statistic, but I am disputing the interpretation of them. The people who stay after being ganked did so because the gank gave them anew area to explore of the game many of then most probably wanted to learn how to fight themselves and it was a change of pace and added more time to their enjoyment. But the people who were not ganked and quit did not leave because they did not get ganked, they left because the game is boring in HIGH sec in the long run if you do not wish to PvP...

...

Unfortunately, the vocal mob of the forums is of the mindset that everyone should PvP and any other opinion gets bombarded and burred alive with rhetoric of what they think and want the game should be like. All the while new players keep on quiting.

I'm sorry to say, but you just post the same flawed ideas over and over without actually considering the counter arguments to your rather flawed proposals. It was mentioned multiple times in multiple threads that expanding Highsec will literally do nothing since it already offers enough space and systems which are completely empty if you are looking for a corner where you don't have to compete with too many people.

If you are thinking that the problem is the PvE content then why are you not asking for more PvE content? In the last years CCP actually started to expand on that and it would not surprise me if they add more interesting content in the future for people who like to shoot NPC etc. This can be added to the Highsec as it is, I don't see why this should be a problem.

The problem most people have with your approach is that you literally try to delete whole parts of the game and the whole core concept that you are not 100% save everywhere. This has nothing to do with the availability of PvE content. Those things are completely unrelated.
Goonswarm Federation
#280 - 2017-03-22 08:37:11 UTC
Sivar Ahishatsu wrote:
This is actually very correct many players undergo the same.

Especially the last part about not giving feedback. Most players will not, They will indeed throw the game in the garbage bin and move on. The problem being the game.


If a new player is busy trying to earn a PLEX, I'm sorry he is doing it wrong. If you were to buy a sub for an entire year it costs $10.95 vs. $19.95 for a PLEX. Grinding for a PLEX is going to be very costly in terms of leisure time forgone, especially for a new player. Such a player is, literally, setting himself up for failure.

Sivar Ahishatsu wrote:
Having said this there is also those who come in to the game fully aware of its realities but simply wanting to enjoy the other aspects of it sans too much PvP aggression or conflict. I mean the occasional suicide gank etc is acceptable, it is part of the reality of the game. But one can still enjoy it through some missions still enjoy various "Careers" between security distribution, mining and research. Small scale industry can be fun as well.

The issue here is of a different nature. people who are not interested too much in PvP aggression and conflict are limited in how far they can have fun in the game.

And in the long terms the game does become boring under that limitation. Someone said I do not remember in which thread that CCP made some statistic and found out that people who were ganked were more likely to stay in game that those that haven't.


First off, this is a competitive game. No matter what you are in competition with other players. You will always be in competition with other players even if you are never ganked.

That is suppose you want to mine. And further suppose you are never, ever ganked. You are still in competition with other players who are mining and buying minerals, and those who are engaged in arbitrage of minerals between regions. The point is, if you define PvP as competition it is everywhere in EVE. You cannot avoid it. Ever.

Now if you want to avoid ship-to-ship PvP fine. Go for it, but given the nature of EVE if another is determined that you experience such PvP you are going to experience it.

So get used to it.

And yes, the analysis suggests that those who interact with other players vs. being isolated in their own solar system never interacting stay substantially longer with the game.

Quote:
I say this maybe so, I would not dispute the factual statistic, but I am disputing the interpretation of them. The people who stay after being ganked did so because the gank gave them anew area to explore of the game many of then most probably wanted to learn how to fight themselves and it was a change of pace and added more time to their enjoyment. But the people who were not ganked and quit did not leave because they did not get ganked, they left because the game is boring in HIGH sec in the long run if you do not wish to PvP...


That is possible, but you are omitting that those killed legally stay almost as lone, on average, as those ganked. The implication is pretty clear: player-on-player interaction is good for retention. That is treating the game as a console game and having no interaction is bad for retention.

Quote:
And I think the actual numbers were not given I seriously think that there were far more people who left than those who stayed.


Of course those who left probably outnumbered those who stayed. Those who were ganked and killed legally were about 15% of the sample. Thus 85% were not suicide ganked or killed legally. So it is reasonable to conclude those who left was larger...but those who left were predominantly those who were not suicide ganked or killed legally. In other words, you don't know how to interpret the data yourself.

I have cut off the rest as it the usual mealy-mouthed nonsense about "Some players do not like PvP." Fine, then GTFO. This is a competitive MMORPG. No matter what you are going to do you are going to come into conflict/competition with other players. Be it via the market, trying to suck up all the ice before the other guy, or shooting him in the face. That is the core nature of the game. Either you grasp that or you get out of f***town.

"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

Forum Jump