These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Tilting at windmills

First post First post
Author
Bolow Santosi
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#61 - 2012-05-03 06:47:31 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Mars Theran wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Vince Snetterton wrote:
Given that the silent majority of the game...



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_silence

In short, you assume that those who do not speak must agree with you. Yet you have provided no evidence other than their silence.


The Government and Lawyers/Court systems do this all the time; why should anyone else be any different?



Lemmings jump off cliffs all the time; why don't you?



Careful encouraging suicide can get you banned for 30 days.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#62 - 2012-05-03 06:51:41 UTC
I keep forgetting that some people would rather be wrong than live.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Fannie Maes
Doomheim
#63 - 2012-05-03 06:53:04 UTC
Bolow Santosi wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Mars Theran wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Vince Snetterton wrote:
Given that the silent majority of the game...



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_silence

In short, you assume that those who do not speak must agree with you. Yet you have provided no evidence other than their silence.


The Government and Lawyers/Court systems do this all the time; why should anyone else be any different?



Lemmings jump off cliffs all the time; why don't you?



Careful encouraging suicide can get you banned for 30 days.



Perhaps stupid but if it is your main goal in life to have another person suicide over a video-game than you deserve to go to hell, for an eternityAttention

Seriously, is your leader an autistic?
Francisco Bizzaro
#64 - 2012-05-03 07:43:12 UTC
Vince Snetterton wrote:
CCP acknowledges through their own numbers that slightly over 70% of all players in game are high sec.
Yet we have essentially one person, Kelduum from E-UNI who is ostensibly high sec, and E-UNI is actually migrating a lot of players to null sec.

I think Issler Dainze is also a high-sec oriented candidate?

If for next year you can find high-sec candidates who are knowledgeable about the game and can attract a support base, that would be great. It's a difficult job to organize high-sec behind a candidate, so good to think about it early.

Quote:

In any case, since the the null sec zealots have realized the past couple years what a powerful meta-game tool the CSM is, they have done everything they can to control it and bend CCP to their will.

People often make statements like this, and I think it greatly exaggerates the role of the CSM. Give CCP some credit, their heads are not always in the sand.

The CSM gives advice on game design. That can be a very influential role, and particularly so when CCP is directionless as they seemed to be through a good portion of last year.

But CCP are running a business. They're not going to let that sink so that Alliance X can control a few extra systems on the map, or earn a bit of extra play money. CCP's interest is to make the game better to attract more users. Any advice they get from the CSM gets filtered through that motivation.

Here is why there's a push towards null-sec:

Eve has some strengths and weaknesses. Among the weaknesses are most of the actual mechanics, including the PVE games. Among the clear strengths is the social environment and player interactions, which has both cooperative and competitive aspects. These are what put the game head and shoulders above the rest - they are so strong that remarkably Eve succeeds despite being broken in so many ways.

Null sec is where the player-driven strengths of the game really take hold - both competitive and cooperative. CCP want to encourage players towards those strengths. Spend a year doing nothing but missions, good chance you'll get bored and leave. Join a good corp and make some friends while trying to get ahead in a hostile universe, you're likely to stick around because you come to appreciate the depth of the game beyond the stupid mechanics.

These are the business reasons for the directions they take. They would make these decisions regardless of who is sitting on the CSM. And they are not one-sided - I think they do try to take into account the game as a whole, including all of the secs and professions. They can't do everything at once, some things do seem to be abandoned, and they don't have a clue as to what to do about my favourite sec. But averaged over a couple of years, most activities should see some progress - because it's good business to have a well-rounded game.

There's no reason to obsess over who is sitting on the CSM. They don't make decisions and they don't rule the game. They don't allocate devs to projects. CCP are adults with their own ideas and philosophy of game design which colours their priorities. For better or worse, they are perfectly capable of ignoring the CSM if they think the game would benefit by a different direction, and I suspect this happens more often than not.

TL;DR: CCP are not puppets.The CSM doesn't rule the game.
Corbin Blair
Doomheim
#65 - 2012-05-03 07:53:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Corbin Blair
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:
Sigurd Sig Hansen wrote:
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:
Yup. Read Soundwaves little stinkbomb on "Inferno and Datacores" Page 7 in GD about moving T2 towards Low and Null (yes, another Goon ISK River like POCO's).


Love that btw, no conflict of interest there AT ALL

Its funny, I actually sat down and watched the TTH interview till the part where Soundwave was all but drooling over the possibility of destroying the T2 market
and I came away with the feeling that he sounds a lot like a Goon.



My Ally Leader and I have been discussing this for quite some time.

A covert GoonAltDevTeam steering game development this way for a few years. But it sounds so tinfoil hat it's almost embarrassing to bring up. That's a GREAT way for them to hide.

Dev PvP ????? Shocked

Since when the **** have goons been involved in faction warfare? Shut the **** up. You idiots need to think before you speak.
Alara IonStorm
#66 - 2012-05-03 08:15:26 UTC
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:

Carebear + PVP + Goons = rotting plushie innards and deceased rainbows

Also delicious desserts.
Ishukone Agent
Doomheim
#67 - 2012-05-03 08:31:47 UTC
Highsec-dweller here...

Personally I don't feel anything that is getting changed in this game as a threat to my playstyle. I'm just playing for the overall game experience not for anything tangible like ISK or ressources (maybe standings for roleplaying purposes). I'm sure there will always be a kind of highsec as a beginner's area, so I'm not afraid I will run out of space...

Regardless I enjoy watching the EVE metagame, EVE politics from the sidelane - it's entertaining and awesome to see things being changed under player influence. But I'm not interested enough to really step in, or try to put through my voice. For the record, I voted for Keldum on all my characters, but that's all the political engagement I can muster...
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#68 - 2012-05-03 08:33:12 UTC
Vince Snetterton wrote:
Given that the silent majority of the game, namely high sec players, don't follow the forums, this thread is pointless.
But I feel like Don Quixote tonight, and am indeed mad as hell.

CCP acknowledges through their own numbers that slightly over 70% of all players in game are high sec.
Yet we have essentially one person, Kelduum from E-UNI who is ostensibly high sec, and E-UNI is actually migrating a lot of players to null sec.

In any case, since the the null sec zealots have realized the past couple years what a powerful meta-game tool the CSM is, they have done everything they can to control it and bend CCP to their will.

If high sec players want any control over their game, they have to become organized, and form a strong voting bloc.
Consider:

There are 400,000 paid accounts on TQ.
That is approx 1 million chars.

goons and test, the 2 largest alliances in the game, add up to 14,000 chars.
That is 1.4 percent of the entire game base.
Assume they all have 3 accounts.
That makes it a whopping 4.2%, yet they with their control of the game and the direction of the game is far, far more than the demographics show.

If even 10% of high sec players were actually engaged in the political process, we could dominate the CSM, and start pushing back at all the attacks by the null sec zealot group in game and within CCP.

We need to stat organizing now, for the next CSM.

But who am I kidding. It won't happen. High sec players will just quit once all the changes coming down the pipe are implemented. Heck, I will likely have packed it in myself, rather than waste my time fighting lost battles in and out of game.

High sec players, consider this a warning for you: Organize now. The next CSM may be your last chance to save high sec in some playable format.


Uhm, did you follow the CSM 7 elections. I ran for high sec and won a seat. I definitely feel your frustration. In 24 hours my alliance will be at war with the goons for speaking out about their leaders poor behavior. I am not sure how CCP sees Eve as serving the majority of its customers when it allows a small group to ruin the game for the majority.

We can only hope new aggression and war mechanics might level the playing field.

Issler
Francisco Bizzaro
#69 - 2012-05-03 08:39:18 UTC
Issler Dainze wrote:
I am not sure how CCP sees Eve as serving the majority of its customers when it allows a small group to ruin the game for the majority.

Is this really what is happening?
Roime
Shiva Furnace
#70 - 2012-05-03 08:45:08 UTC
Francisco Bizzaro wrote:
Issler Dainze wrote:
I am not sure how CCP sees Eve as serving the majority of its customers when it allows a small group to ruin the game for the majority.

Is this really what is happening?


Nope.

Majority is enjoying the game and understand that in a game about insterstellar combat for resources and power, wardecs are part of the game.

.

Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#71 - 2012-05-03 08:51:25 UTC
Issler Dainze wrote:
I am not sure how CCP sees Eve as serving the majority of its customers when it allows a small group to ruin the game for the majority.

We can only hope new aggression and war mechanics might level the playing field.

Issler


Have you met CCP before? CCP makes the game the way they want it to be.
If you like EVE then feel free to subscribe and play
If you don't like it then you can gtfo
This is how CCP has been from day 1

Did you watch fanfest? Whenever some guy asked a whiny question like "but how will we weasel out of wardecs now?" CCP would just ignore them and say this is how the game is going to be and you have to deal with it.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#72 - 2012-05-03 08:55:10 UTC
Issler Dainze wrote:
Vince Snetterton wrote:
Given that the silent majority of the game, namely high sec players, don't follow the forums, this thread is pointless.
But I feel like Don Quixote tonight, and am indeed mad as hell.

CCP acknowledges through their own numbers that slightly over 70% of all players in game are high sec.
Yet we have essentially one person, Kelduum from E-UNI who is ostensibly high sec, and E-UNI is actually migrating a lot of players to null sec.

In any case, since the the null sec zealots have realized the past couple years what a powerful meta-game tool the CSM is, they have done everything they can to control it and bend CCP to their will.

If high sec players want any control over their game, they have to become organized, and form a strong voting bloc.
Consider:

There are 400,000 paid accounts on TQ.
That is approx 1 million chars.

goons and test, the 2 largest alliances in the game, add up to 14,000 chars.
That is 1.4 percent of the entire game base.
Assume they all have 3 accounts.
That makes it a whopping 4.2%, yet they with their control of the game and the direction of the game is far, far more than the demographics show.

If even 10% of high sec players were actually engaged in the political process, we could dominate the CSM, and start pushing back at all the attacks by the null sec zealot group in game and within CCP.

We need to stat organizing now, for the next CSM.

But who am I kidding. It won't happen. High sec players will just quit once all the changes coming down the pipe are implemented. Heck, I will likely have packed it in myself, rather than waste my time fighting lost battles in and out of game.

High sec players, consider this a warning for you: Organize now. The next CSM may be your last chance to save high sec in some playable format.


Uhm, did you follow the CSM 7 elections. I ran for high sec and won a seat. I definitely feel your frustration. In 24 hours my alliance will be at war with the goons for speaking out about their leaders poor behavior. I am not sure how CCP sees Eve as serving the majority of its customers when it allows a small group to ruin the game for the majority.

We can only hope new aggression and war mechanics might level the playing field.

Issler


You forgot to mention your own poor behaviour, for which you were also required to apologise in public.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Sevastian Liao
DreamWeaver Inc.
#73 - 2012-05-03 09:14:47 UTC
o/ Highsec player here.

I voted in the recent CSM elections, but not for a highsec candidate - I believe it was for one of the WH representatives running on an industrial platform, whose name escapes me at the moment. For a simple reason - After reading through their various threads/blogs the non - highsec candidates left the impression of having a more in - depth understanding of the game and its workings, as well as running platforms focused on making the overall game more challenging - and hence, fun. That's a vision I can get behind.

So no, just because the non - highsec CSM candidates got the majority of the votes doesn't mean that all highsec residents ignored the elections. I don't see myself as a player confined only to a certain area of space - So as far as i'm concerned i'm going to vote for someone who presents himself as being capable enough to get the job done and benefit the game as a whole. Some of us could have, you know, had a different opinion and voted for someone whose platform we agreed with - instead of voting for highsec candidates just on account of them being "Our boys".
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#74 - 2012-05-03 09:19:13 UTC
Jessie-A Tassik wrote:
You have a very generous definition of "growth".

http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility


Jessie-A Tassik is correct. It definitely looks like player numbers have dropped.

Obviously it seems there's a few players posting in this thread who don't know how to read charts and graphs. They keep spouting incorrect assumptions even after factual proof is presented, constantly bellowing out fallacies like "Eve has grown steadily year after year since it began." or "The only drops in Eve's subscriptions coincide with PvE high sec content." Stop posting lies and look at the evidence.


What that chart shows is from 2006 "Bloodlines Expansion" to the middle of 2009 "Apocrypha Expansion" there was definitely steady growth. In the middle of 2009 there was a huge drop that leveled out for about 6 months. That is the longest stretch of time with a steady low amount of player numbers making it the low base reference point ..

From the middle of 2009 to present day growth has been sporadic and short term followed by a large initial drop and a long steady decrease in player numbers each time.

Each consecutive short growth spurt has been exponentially larger than the previous one. Probably due to good advertising, PR work for expansions, word of mouth, etc.

However, each consecutive short term growth spurt has been followed with an even larger initial drop and steady gradual decrease in numbers bringing it back down around the initial low reference point of 2009. Probably due to various bugs, unfinished content, people being disillusioned by the PR advertising, etc.

The chart shows the amount of player numbers now currently active is a bit lower than the high player count listed in the middle of 2009 during "Apocrypha". The actual highest amount of player numbers active online only lasted for a few months which coincides with the release of "Incursion".

Since the current amount of active players now online is less than or maybe equal to the amount of active players back in 2009, how does that equate into Eve steadily growing year after year?
Scien Inkunen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#75 - 2012-05-03 09:54:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Scien Inkunen
Things are (like I see them), there is a group of players that take this game most seriously. And when something requires serious devoting, there are real money involved in some way and there gaming stops and something other come to surface.

For my two years of playing EVE, I did not see or hear about someone taking honest (or almost honest) action about anything – meaning, helping to achieve some good for majority of players. Until now, everything is who will screw who – and any other action is meaningless because it will never get support from others mainly of that distrust.

Malice is widely spread in this community and someone earns a lot from it. If Goons and Test are enough for CCP to maintain the game and support them in any way, then anything other is doom to failure and mark as troll or tears.
Any serious action is organized privately if you want to be fruitful and to achieve your goal – speaking publicly (specially here) will be mocked.

Read the "Fart file" and you will understand the meaning of life !

Ai Shun
#76 - 2012-05-03 10:32:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Ai Shun
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Jessie-A Tassik wrote:
You have a very generous definition of "growth".

http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility


Jessie-A Tassik is correct. It definitely looks like player numbers have dropped.

Obviously it seems there's a few players posting in this thread who don't know how to read charts and graphs. They keep spouting incorrect assumptions even after factual proof is presented, constantly bellowing out fallacies like "Eve has grown steadily year after year since it began." or "The only drops in Eve's subscriptions coincide with PvE high sec content." Stop posting lies and look at the evidence.


What that chart shows is from 2006 "Bloodlines Expansion" to the middle of 2009 "Apocrypha Expansion" there was definitely steady growth. In the middle of 2009 there was a huge drop that leveled out for about 6 months. That is the longest stretch of time with a steady low amount of player numbers making it the low base reference point ..

From the middle of 2009 to present day growth has been sporadic and short term followed by a large initial drop and a long steady decrease in player numbers each time.

Each consecutive short growth spurt has been exponentially larger than the previous one. Probably due to good advertising, PR work for expansions, word of mouth, etc.

However, each consecutive short term growth spurt has been followed with an even larger initial drop and steady gradual decrease in numbers bringing it back down around the initial low reference point of 2009. Probably due to various bugs, unfinished content, people being disillusioned by the PR advertising, etc.

The chart shows the amount of player numbers now currently active is a bit lower than the high player count listed in the middle of 2009 during "Apocrypha". The actual highest amount of player numbers active online only lasted for a few months which coincides with the release of "Incursion".

Since the current amount of active players now online is less than or maybe equal to the amount of active players back in 2009, how does that equate into Eve steadily growing year after year?


Let's play the game your silly way. Are there more players now than in 2004? In fact, is CCP's released subscription numbers higher? I see somebody linked those numbers earlier.

The 2012 number of subscribers are higher than the 2010 numbers. That looks like growth to me. Slow, small growth thanks to the debacle last year; but still growth.
Mythrandier
Solace Corp
#77 - 2012-05-03 11:14:23 UTC
Vince Snetterton wrote:
Given that the silent majority of the game, namely high sec players, don't follow the forums, this thread is pointless.
But I feel like Don Quixote tonight, and am indeed mad as hell.

CCP acknowledges through their own numbers that slightly over 70% of all players in game are high sec.
Yet we have essentially one person, Kelduum from E-UNI who is ostensibly high sec, and E-UNI is actually migrating a lot of players to null sec.

In any case, since the the null sec zealots have realized the past couple years what a powerful meta-game tool the CSM is, they have done everything they can to control it and bend CCP to their will.

If high sec players want any control over their game, they have to become organized, and form a strong voting bloc.
Consider:

There are 400,000 paid accounts on TQ.
That is approx 1 million chars.

goons and test, the 2 largest alliances in the game, add up to 14,000 chars.
That is 1.4 percent of the entire game base.
Assume they all have 3 accounts.
That makes it a whopping 4.2%, yet they with their control of the game and the direction of the game is far, far more than the demographics show.

If even 10% of high sec players were actually engaged in the political process, we could dominate the CSM, and start pushing back at all the attacks by the null sec zealot group in game and within CCP.

We need to stat organizing now, for the next CSM.

But who am I kidding. It won't happen. High sec players will just quit once all the changes coming down the pipe are implemented. Heck, I will likely have packed it in myself, rather than waste my time fighting lost battles in and out of game.

High sec players, consider this a warning for you: Organize now. The next CSM may be your last chance to save high sec in some playable format.



I'm curious as to exactly what it is you want. You mention “pushing back” low sec “zealots” but no actual details. Are you simply referring to control of a CSM candidate?

I'm not wanting to jump to conclusions here, but your post comes across as someone who joined EvE knowing it was a harsh, pvp based game and now wants to make it safe and cosy. Please correct me if I have misunderstood you.

"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move." -  D. Adams.

Asuri Kinnes
Perkone
Caldari State
#78 - 2012-05-03 11:26:35 UTC
Simi Kusoni wrote:
People need to learn to analyse statistics better. They are not always particularly useful, especially not when you just take them at face value.

Protip: In the Q4 2010 economic statement, CCP revealed that the average is 2.2 accounts / character. So if *every* null sec person had 2.2 accounts, it would still only account for roughly 40% of in game toons.

That still leaves 60% of all characters that aren't associated with Null Sec...

Not saying they're all hi-sec'ers, but still...

Bob is the god of Wormholes.

That's all you need to know.

Harland White
Adventurer's Guild
#79 - 2012-05-03 11:37:20 UTC
Markus Reese wrote:
Business says lose the 10 to get 20.


Yeah Blizzard thought that way about WoW too soon after vanilla and TBC, and we saw where it went. All for the masses, none for the real players.

By their fruit you will recognize them.

RAP ACTION HERO
#80 - 2012-05-03 11:39:01 UTC
what do you hisecers want again?

vitoc erryday