These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Five ways to increase the game population

Author
Velicitia
XS Tech
#61 - 2012-06-07 11:05:35 UTC
Andy DelGardo wrote:
Velicitia wrote:

I'm not saying a Chinese alliance *couldn't* take sov somewhere ... but using the info provided, it seems they'd be hard pressed to hold space for an appreciable length of time...


mhh maybe they simply zerg us? Having 500k chinese players vs 100k westerns :) I can foresee chinese "super-bloops".



perhaps ... but that's tangent to the discussion of "make a PvE server" (which is still a bad ideaBlink)

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia

Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#62 - 2012-06-07 11:06:24 UTC
Andy DelGardo wrote:
Simi Kusoni wrote:

Quite a useful post for illustrating how PvP (or a lack thereof) impacts the market and industry.


The more interesting question would be, what would happen if u open up the chinese server to more/all westerners? Having clueless shiny kills, probably seems interesting to the pvp folks. Would the chinese pve population complain or leave the game or simply continue and adapt?

Given their pacifistic nature, and the fact that they have grown used to their environment, it's likely many of them would leave.

And I know what you are going to say, "the same happens on tranquillity", and you're going to argue that we'd benefit from allowing care bears their own server. But as mentioned in Khoda's post the care bear server would suffer population issues, alongside a lack of demand for items that would heavily stifle industrialists.

It's likely many people would join the PvE server, get bored and quit. Similarly on the PvP server the population would decrease possibly quite drastically, although it's unlikely industry would halt there since PvP players are usually care bears too.

Quite simply the Chinese server is like a sped up view of how mudflation will effect Eve should a balance between ship destruction and production not be met.

Also, CCP couldn't "open the Chinese server" even should they wish to.

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]

Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#63 - 2012-06-07 11:08:52 UTC
Andy DelGardo wrote:
mhh maybe they simply zerg us? Having 500k chinese players vs 100k westerns :) I can foresee chinese "super-bloops".

PS: Btw can CCP actually maintain the single shard policy if much more players would join? I mean can they simply upgrade there servers, since what happens if 5k+ players want to jump into Jita or fleets of 500+ want to fight? Would this not mean those zones would have constantly time dilation at 50%+ activated, which would suck?

CCP have stated previously that they have the capacity for considerably more players, I'm not sure on the per-node player limitations but I'm sure they could be reduced or removed with considerable upgrades to both the server and the code governing the network.

Both of which are things I'm sure CCP would be capable of doing should their player base expand sufficiently.

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]

Andy DelGardo
#64 - 2012-06-07 11:10:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Andy DelGardo
Simi Kusoni wrote:

And I know what you are going to say, "the same happens on tranquillity", and you're going to argue that we'd benefit from allowing care bears their own server. But as mentioned in Khoda's post the care bear server would suffer population issues, alongside a lack of demand for items that would heavily stifle industrialists.


Actually not :) like i stated i'm a industrialist and thats the only fun way i can play eve, since all other game mechanics are so weak and boring in my opinion. So ofc i need those crazy killing speeing guys/girls. If i watch a large null blop video, the most interesting part is to count how many ships/supers for what ISK value gets destroyed or to notice that some null fleet doctrine did change so demand might go up :) I even welcome hulkageddon and burn jita, the more u shake the market the more fun it is for me, since shaky market = lots of ISKy opportunities.

My main point is simply that u can't bluntly argue that what the OP "suggests" in a "feature and ideas" forum is absurd or complete BS or that he don't get eve. I always get angry if i read those nonsense "Eve is no theme-park game, so GTFO/STFU", this is simply to black/white arguing to me.
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#65 - 2012-06-07 11:15:01 UTC
Andy DelGardo wrote:
Simi Kusoni wrote:

And I know what you are going to say, "the same happens on tranquillity", and you're going to argue that we'd benefit from allowing care bears their own server. But as mentioned in Khoda's post the care bear server would suffer population issues, alongside a lack of demand for items that would heavily stifle industrialists.


Actually not :) like i stated i'm a industrialist and thats the only fun way i can play eve, since all other game mechanics are so weak and boring in my opinion. So ofc i need those crazy killing speeing guys/girls. If i watch a large null blop video, the most interesting part is to count how many ships/supers for what ISK value gets destroyed or to notice that some null fleet doctrine did change so demand might go up :) I even welcome hulkageddon and burn jita, the more u shake the market the more fun it is for me, since shaky market = lots of ISKy opportunities.

Hehe, good to know.

But yeah, I want the Tengu doctrine to come back in force. I miss expensive nanoribbons Lol

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]

Andy DelGardo
#66 - 2012-06-07 11:18:10 UTC
Simi Kusoni wrote:

But yeah, I want the Tengu doctrine to come back in force. I miss expensive nanoribbons Lol


hehe actually the prices keep going up for some days and there is quite some market manipulation for the RE parts :) Caldari decryptors where at 25m 6 hours ago :)
Velicitia
XS Tech
#67 - 2012-06-07 11:28:01 UTC
Simi Kusoni wrote:
Andy DelGardo wrote:
Simi Kusoni wrote:

And I know what you are going to say, "the same happens on tranquillity", and you're going to argue that we'd benefit from allowing care bears their own server. But as mentioned in Khoda's post the care bear server would suffer population issues, alongside a lack of demand for items that would heavily stifle industrialists.


Actually not :) like i stated i'm a industrialist and thats the only fun way i can play eve, since all other game mechanics are so weak and boring in my opinion. So ofc i need those crazy killing speeing guys/girls. If i watch a large null blop video, the most interesting part is to count how many ships/supers for what ISK value gets destroyed or to notice that some null fleet doctrine did change so demand might go up :) I even welcome hulkageddon and burn jita, the more u shake the market the more fun it is for me, since shaky market = lots of ISKy opportunities.

Hehe, good to know.

But yeah, I want the Tengu doctrine to come back in force. I miss expensive nanoribbons Lol



I'm still trying to figure this out ... but I think Andy came to our line of reasoning ...

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia

Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#68 - 2012-06-07 20:36:59 UTC
Andy DelGardo wrote:
fleets of 500+ want to fight?



You mean like they do anyway, frequently?

Jita is capped, but there's plenty of space in EVE with few or no people in it. There's room for more people.
Imrik86
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#69 - 2012-06-07 21:13:41 UTC
Amdor Renevat wrote:

Blah blah blah...


Increase the population? Are you f***** kidding? They need to reduce the hell of it, 50-66% of the logged players are just alts.
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#70 - 2012-06-07 22:43:54 UTC
Amdor Renevat wrote:
Xorv wrote:
Andy DelGardo wrote:
Xorv wrote:

You don't seem to understand what Sandbox MMOs are about, nor what it is that attracts players to such games. Given you're motivated, not lazy, educated, and reasonably intelligent what could be the reason for this blatant oversight? Closed Mindedness!


I don't think any has to-do with "closed Mindedness", but simply with experience and different taste. There is no rule that states sandbox games need to have pvp at all, thats just something every developer has to decide for himself.


In regard to the OPer and those like him, yes it is about closed mindedness. Where it isn't closed mindedness it's ignorance. It's fine to have different tastes. The problem is people coming to an activity which given the smallest amount of research would reveal it wasn't for people with their taste, but coming regardless and trying to change the activity to suit themselves. Would you go to a venue for line dancers and demand they change the music from Country to Hip Hop so you can break dance? Do you join a Rugby league then demand the rules be changed so you can play Soccer? If you were a point based karate competitor would it be reasonable for you to demand the UFC make their rules less "hardcore" because your experience and taste is different, but for some reason you still want to participate and compete for the UFC belt?

In regards to Sandbox RPGs; If the sandbox game is massively multiplayer and built around warfare and competition (which almost all MMOs are), then yes it does need to have PvP. A game like EVE must have PvP, because it's defined as such by virtue of being a Sandbox with multiple players, built around competition in a background of conflict.


You almost have a good analogy, but not quite. The problem is that Eve already offers line dancing and hip hop. The problem as I see it is that hip hop is allowed on every dance floor thus interfering with the people that like to line dance. All I'm suggesting is separate rooms for hip hop and line dancing to take place. I feel the dance club would get more patrons if the line dancing fans had a place to call their own while still having plenty of room for the hip hop crowd to enjoy their dance style.

The same idea applies to the rugby/soccer analogy. The rugby league has plenty of fields to accommodate the people that want to play soccer, more people prefer to play soccer, but since the rugby team was there first they feel that the entire area has to be for rugby even if that means a lot of the fields go unused and people leave the league after a few short months.


No you still don't get it. Your adaptation of my analogies would only apply in the event of separate servers, or where the two forms of gameplay are completely firewalled from each other. When you PvE in EVE your impacting and interacting with the whole game, not just your own, and not just some imagined PvE zone, but the whole game! So, it really is a case of you asking to impact the same game as the rest of us, but apply rules limiting how the rest of us can impact you. It's asking to have your cake and eat it. It's a completely unreasonable demand.

Understand this, in the context of MMORPGs Sandbox does not mean everyone gets to do whatever they want in terms of style of gameplay. It means we're all dumped in the same sandbox together where we can apply our own creativity and will to shaping the sand in that box. But, so to can every other person in the box, and we're all playing with the same sand. When you understand this and its implications you will begin to see how foolish these requests for separating PvP from PvE really are, and will in turn stop making terrible suggestions for EVE.
Andy DelGardo
#71 - 2012-06-08 12:59:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Andy DelGardo
Xorv wrote:

No you still don't get it. Your adaptation of my analogies would only apply in the event of separate servers, or where the two forms of gameplay are completely firewalled from each other. When you PvE in EVE your impacting and interacting with the whole game, not just your own, and not just some imagined PvE zone, but the whole game! So, it really is a case of you asking to impact the same game as the rest of us, but apply rules limiting how the rest of us can impact you. It's asking to have your cake and eat it. It's a completely unreasonable demand.

Understand this, in the context of MMORPGs Sandbox does not mean everyone gets to do whatever they want in terms of style of gameplay. It means we're all dumped in the same sandbox together where we can apply our own creativity and will to shaping the sand in that box. But, so to can every other person in the box, and we're all playing with the same sand. When you understand this and its implications you will begin to see how foolish these requests for separating PvP from PvE really are, and will in turn stop making terrible suggestions for EVE.


Actually, at least i "think" i get what u are saying.
This whole argumentation still boils down to u wanting to keep Eve's "current" vision of the game and the OP wanting to change this vision. I remember similar discussions in EQ, back in the days. Its ofc your right as player and customer to wanting to keep it the way it is, but its also the "right" of other players to simply "suggest" changes, even if they undermine the "current" vision of the game and its unfair to label those suggestions as "foolish" or "unreasonable".

In the end as long as eve keeps making good money, those changes will never be implemented and we can argue all day long. Its when eve starts going down, that we may see more drastic and desperate changes, that strive from its original vision.

So i agree that different players have different visions and that CCP has there own :p
Captain John Wanger
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#72 - 2012-06-22 02:06:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Captain John Wanger
You know why this game is going to die, outside of the reality of economic reasons hitting the real global economy?

It's quite simple, really, when a paying customer who is BRAND NEW to the game is openly called a ******(Awesome, the word R-e-t-a-r-d is filtered out here in the forum but not in game) repeatedly, for asking a question that was related to the TUTORIAL, and then when no one would answer the question, I used caps because I was stuck in game and in the middle of a mission, the caps were not disruptive or flooded but used once and effectively to try to get someone's attention(funny thing, the guy that called me ****** used caps to call me such, but that was allowed, repeatedly) to try to attempt at getting an answer to my question, I was then immediately admonished by a moderator, and after telling him to **** off, was removed from being able to chat.

Now what is wrong with this picture? I think it is obvious. Unfortunately the same day I opened an account I closed it, highly doubt I will obtain a refund. So much for the customer being right, or even being a customer in this case. Personally, after my experience, I hope they go out of business and none of them be allowed back in to the field by sheer reputation of being so short sited when it comes to the treatment of their potentially new revenue.
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#73 - 2012-06-22 02:25:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Simi Kusoni
Captain John Wanger wrote:
You know why this game is going to die, outside of the reality of economic reasons hitting the real global economy?

It's quite simple, really, when a paying customer who is BRAND NEW to the game is openly called a ******(Awesome, the word R-e-t-a-r-d is filtered out here in the forum but not in game) repeatedly, for asking a question that was related to the TUTORIAL, and then when no one would answer the question, I used caps because I was stuck in game and in the middle of a mission, the caps were not disruptive or flooded but used once and effectively to try to get someone's attention(funny thing, the guy that called me ****** used caps to call me such, but that was allowed, repeatedly) to try to attempt at getting an answer to my question, I was then immediately admonished by a moderator, and after telling him to **** off, was removed from being able to chat.

Now what is wrong with this picture? I think it is obvious. Unfortunately the same day I opened an account I closed it, highly doubt I will obtain a refund. So much for the customer being right, or even being a customer in this case. Personally, after my experience, I hope they go out of business and none of them be allowed back in to the field by sheer reputation of being so short sited when it comes to the treatment of their potentially new revenue.

What is wrong with this picture?

The fact that you sound like an angry and poor adjusted person who was raging in a public help channel, where people help others of their own free will.

If no one knew the answer to your problem, or if a moderator was busy while you were asking it and missed the question, then you should have waited or filed a petition. Using caps lock, spamming and getting aggravated in the help channel is not wise. Nor is telling a moderator to **** off.

Quite simply, if you aren't a troll*, good riddance.

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]

Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#74 - 2012-06-22 02:25:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Simi Kusoni
*If you are a troll, welcome to Eve Online. You're going to love it here.

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]