These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Why Eve isn't more popular?

First post
Author
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#241 - 2014-05-13 15:42:20 UTC
Organic Lager wrote:
Ramona McCandless wrote:
Organic Lager wrote:
Ramona McCandless wrote:
Organic Lager wrote:


How do you not see an issue with this? You shouldn't fly a valuable paper tanked mining boat or I'm going to blow you up in my valueless paper tanked dessy. This causes an unbalance of one side putting far less on the line then the other and a situation of the pot calling the kettle black.

Nothing will drive a new player away faster then feeling cheated or being unable to play.


Sorry, are you being sarcastic? Im probably being teh dumb but I cant tell, sorry


Why do you say that?


Because a Procurer is about as far from paper tanked as any T1 ship short of a BC or BS can be and its the easiest barge to fly


I say paper tanked mining ships and you bring up the cheapest most heavily tanked ship? Everyone who wants to mine should all be flying procurers with tank mods and stop any form of progression in the mining field, yeah that's really going to get people to stay. **** pay and the feeling of working towards nothing.



Er, the notion of "progressing" through ships is baggage that people bring with them from other games. Ships are just tools in a toolbox. If you need to pound nails, you grab the hammer. If you need to drive screws, you grab the screwdriver. You don't "progress" from the hammer to the screwdriver.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/

Harry Forever
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#242 - 2014-05-13 15:42:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Harry Forever
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
Harry Forever wrote:
they forgot something about new players... one in a million goes directly to VFK and kills a goon... just saying
And fair play to you for doing so Harry, it's just a shame that your earlier posting style rubbed people up the wrong way and ruined it P

Thankfully you appear to have mellowed a bit Big smile


I burned out fast, mixing solo play with teamplay did not work, however I don't regret to bring up people to do the same, but for me its best to just concentrate on what I'm doing, the only way I'm in full control...
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Doomheim
#243 - 2014-05-13 15:50:25 UTC
While I would never presume to naysay a follower of space-detective and grand moral inquisitor Ripard Teg, I think this pretty much sums up the issue and simple resolution.

F
Organic Lager
Drinking Buddies
#244 - 2014-05-13 16:03:26 UTC
Ramona McCandless wrote:
Organic Lager wrote:


I say paper tanked mining ships and you bring up the cheapest most heavily tanked ship? Everyone who wants to mine should all be flying procurers with tank mods and stop any form of progression in the mining field, yeah that's really going to get people to stay. **** pay and the feeling of working towards nothing.


The cheapest most heavily tanked mining ship is the easiest to fly, so doesnt that suggest that newer players and solo artists should be using it? We arent talking about everyone who wants to mine. We ARE talking about new players.

Please tell me more about how flying a Retriever is so much more sensible and "progresses" the field of mining. This is a term I haven't heard used in regards to the different ways to be the slowest isk/hour profession.

Organic Lager wrote:
Not to mention you completely glazed over the fact that a gank cata still has no reason to use a single tank mod. Why are gankers allowed to use the most efficent ship to maximize effectivness when everyone else is expected to gimp their effectiveness?


Plenty of people do their first few missions in them, so theres a reason to tank them. Plenty of people use them to salvage, and that too can benefit from a tank every now and again.

Your sentence regarding min/max effectiveness shows a poor understanding of the ships, their roles and how they are used.


Yes, you're right, of course. Suicide ganking someones ship has never caused a player, new or old, to leave eve. (This is sarcaism)
Velicitia
XS Tech
#245 - 2014-05-13 16:03:28 UTC
Ramona McCandless wrote:
Organic Lager wrote:


I say paper tanked mining ships and you bring up the cheapest most heavily tanked ship? Everyone who wants to mine should all be flying procurers with tank mods and stop any form of progression in the mining field, yeah that's really going to get people to stay. **** pay and the feeling of working towards nothing.


The cheapest most heavily tanked mining ship is the easiest to fly, so doesnt that suggest that newer players and solo artists should be using it? We arent talking about everyone who wants to mine. We ARE talking about new players.

Please tell me more about how flying a Retriever is so much more sensible and "progresses" the field of mining. This is a term I haven't heard used in regards to the different ways to be the slowest isk/hour profession.



there used to be a progression of sorts (Procurer* -> Retriever -> Covetor** -> Hulk for rocks ... s/Hulk/Mackinaw/ for Ice ... s/Hulk/Skiff/ for Mercx.) ... but that was done away with a few years ago.

* Mined worse than an Osprey though, thanks to T2 mods

** Only used if you were too poor to afford a hulk

These days it's people whinging that they can't outmine a retreiver/Mackinaw with either of the other ones if they fit a DCU II (BIG HINT CCP -- BAD MINERS WILL NEVER SACRIFICE YIELD FOR ANY REASON). Admittedly though, the fitting is a little too tight on the barges -- you can't use less efficient lasers in order to cram on that extra hardener like you can with most of the other ships (such as using meta 4 guns), or sacrifice a little gank (yield) to fit that DCU ... and replace it with a slightly less effective overall rig* (e.g. T2 Mag Field Stab = 10% ROF and 1.1x DMG Mod .... replace with Hybrid Burst Aerator rig and still get your ROF bonus ... or the Collision Accelerator and keep the DMG Mod ... or use T2 rigs and get 15% / 1.15)

*Note -- I'm assuming you only have room for one rig (because you need the other slots / calibration for something else)

Ramona McCandless wrote:
Organic Lager wrote:
Not to mention you completely glazed over the fact that a gank cata still has no reason to use a single tank mod. Why are gankers allowed to use the most efficent ship to maximize effectivness when everyone else is expected to gimp their effectiveness?


Plenty of people do their first few missions in them, so theres a reason to tank them. Plenty of people use them to salvage, and that too can benefit from a tank every now and again.

Your sentence regarding min/max effectiveness shows a poor understanding of the ships, their roles and how they are used.


Y'know Ramona -- the way I'm reading the GP post is that it's not fair that the miners can't preemptively shoot gankers, lest they get obliterated by CONCORD. Perhaps the root of the problem lies in CONCORD themselves?

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

Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#246 - 2014-05-13 16:07:55 UTC
Organic Lager wrote:


Yes, you're right, of course. Suicide ganking someones ship has never caused a player, new or old, to leave eve. (This is sarcaism)


And this is important because...?

Is EvE special in some way that we should be pandering to those who dont like it?

When someone tries to play, for the sake of argument, CoD, and gets killed because they find the controls difficult or dont understand the game mechanics and quits, should EA change that game to suit them?

No, that would be stupid.

By the same yardstick if some one cannot tell that a 30,000EHP Proc is a ship that will more likely survive a gank than a 10,000 EHP Retriever, then this game is too hard for them.

I have no wish for it to be easier for people who cannot understand this concept.

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann

Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#247 - 2014-05-13 16:25:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
SurrenderMonkey wrote:



Er, the notion of "progressing" through ships is baggage that people bring with them from other games. Ships are just tools in a toolbox. If you need to pound nails, you grab the hammer. If you need to drive screws, you grab the screwdriver. You don't "progress" from the hammer to the screwdriver.



This is a very basic concept that sanbox players embrace and themepark players can't grasp. It's not sandbox players raging at the loss of a tool (ship) when it blows up, it's theme park types for which that ship represents an 'achievment'.

Much of the problem here is people being out of place and having bad expectations while playing the wrong kind of game. These people are a minority, the majority of people who wouldn't like EVE actually quit before they get to deep into it because they recognize that it's not their thing (and this is how it should be).

But the few themeparkers that don't quit get 'stuck'....they don't like the game, it's game play and how that game play exposes them to the actions of other players, but they've "invested too much" to just walk away. So they complain and lobby the developers for more and more themepark lol.
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#248 - 2014-05-13 16:28:43 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
SurrenderMonkey wrote:



Er, the notion of "progressing" through ships is baggage that people bring with them from other games. Ships are just tools in a toolbox. If you need to pound nails, you grab the hammer. If you need to drive screws, you grab the screwdriver. You don't "progress" from the hammer to the screwdriver.



This is a very basic concept that sanbox players embrace and themepark players can't grasp. It's not sandbox players raging at the lose of a tool (ship), it's theme park types for which that ship represents an 'achievment'.


+1

Anyone here do cyno? Yes, no?

Anyone who doesnt do it care to guess what the most popular ship is for lighting the beacon and moving multi-billion isk assets around the universe?

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann

Darth Kilth
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#249 - 2014-05-13 16:31:41 UTC
Ramona McCandless wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
SurrenderMonkey wrote:



Er, the notion of "progressing" through ships is baggage that people bring with them from other games. Ships are just tools in a toolbox. If you need to pound nails, you grab the hammer. If you need to drive screws, you grab the screwdriver. You don't "progress" from the hammer to the screwdriver.



This is a very basic concept that sanbox players embrace and themepark players can't grasp. It's not sandbox players raging at the lose of a tool (ship), it's theme park types for which that ship represents an 'achievment'.


+1

Anyone here do cyno? Yes, no?

Anyone who doesnt do it care to guess what the most popular ship is for lighting the beacon and moving multi-billion isk assets around the universe?

oh oh, let me guess!

Newb ship?
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#250 - 2014-05-13 16:33:37 UTC
Darth Kilth wrote:

oh oh, let me guess!

Newb ship?



http://bit.ly/1gA8ioc !

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann

Velicitia
XS Tech
#251 - 2014-05-13 16:33:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Velicitia
Ramona McCandless wrote:

+1

Anyone here do cyno? Yes, no?

Anyone who doesnt do it care to guess what the most popular ship is for lighting the beacon and moving multi-billion isk assets around the universe?


Velator is awesome for the task (or used to be).

Ed -- DAMMIT beaten to the answer!

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

Prince Kobol
#252 - 2014-05-13 16:49:59 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
SurrenderMonkey wrote:



Er, the notion of "progressing" through ships is baggage that people bring with them from other games. Ships are just tools in a toolbox. If you need to pound nails, you grab the hammer. If you need to drive screws, you grab the screwdriver. You don't "progress" from the hammer to the screwdriver.



This is a very basic concept that sanbox players embrace and themepark players can't grasp. It's not sandbox players raging at the loss of a tool (ship) when it blows up, it's theme park types for which that ship represents an 'achievment'.

Much of the problem here is people being out of place and having bad expectations while playing the wrong kind of game. These people are a minority, the majority of people who wouldn't like EVE actually quit before they get to deep into it because they recognize that it's not their thing (and this is how it should be).

But the few themeparkers that don't quit get 'stuck'....they don't like the game, it's game play and how that game play exposes them to the actions of other players, but they've "invested too much" to just walk away. So they complain and lobby the developers for more and more themepark lol.


Whilst I would agree with all of this, Eve biggest problem is getting new players to experience the best of Eve fairly early on.

I would wager most people who start Eve these days are well aware what the game is all about but getting from

Point A - New player in a NPC corp who has just been bored to tears by the NPE to

Point B - A Decent Corp where they can be taught the basics of the game and experience most of what PvE has otr offer to the rush and excrement of PvP without getting scammed, axowed ganked in 2 minutes or called a spai, noob etc is actually pretty damn difficult lol.
Darth Kilth
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#253 - 2014-05-13 16:50:04 UTC
What's the point of a multiplayer sandbox if you can't kick over the sandcastles others build? Eventually the entire sandbox would be filled with sandcastles...
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#254 - 2014-05-13 17:00:44 UTC
Organic Lager wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Tare Bloodraven wrote:

Tech I destroyers are for killing Tech 1 frigates LOL


No, they're not. They're for dealing a large amount of DPS in a vulnerable platform.

You know, killing miners.

But since you're asking for a Hulk to isk tank them, and crying about how a 10 mil ship can kill a 200 mil one, yeah, you're being a carebear.


How do you not see an issue with this? You shouldn't fly a valuable paper tanked mining boat or I'm going to blow you up in my valueless paper tanked dessy. This causes an unbalance of one side putting far less on the line then the other and a situation of the pot calling the kettle black.

Nothing will drive a new player away faster then feeling cheated or being unable to play.


Yeah, turns out a non combat ship loses a fight to a combat ship.

I see no issue with that. No matter what their pricetags are.

Oh, and that's not unbalanced, by the way. In fact it would almost be the definition of good game balance, because their arbitrary pricetag does not determine the winner, but rather which pilot fits and flies better.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

Sato Page
Auctor Illuminatas Infinitum
#255 - 2014-05-13 17:04:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Sato Page
Yes, I believe PvE should be more fun. But people must understand PvE grind is eve's way to punish failure in PvP. The adrenaline rush you feel during PvP is because failures in eve is meaningful. Then again people PvE for the reward. I think the balance between PvP rush and PvE reward is zero sum, it is up to CCP to decide if they want more HTFU PvPer or more I want more isk PvEer. To preserve the PvP core of eve means the game will never grow. Make PvE less of a punishment then the core of eve PvP is lost.

Dinsdale Pirannha for [u]CEO [/u]of [u]CCP[/u]

Nalelmir Ahashion
Industrial Management and Engineering
Mouth Trumpet Cavalry
#256 - 2014-05-13 17:15:14 UTC
It's not the pve the pvp or at any rate I don't know why anyone would want less content...

the problem has two reasons.
1. Cinematic trailers which are a LIE. Many people watch this awesome action trailer see all the folks inside then Log in and .. shite.. excel mod wtf.
2. The UI is complicated and usually crap. I've bought my first pc in 1992 it had DOS\Norton Commander combo and even with all the commands there and sick violent games of that time without online wikis and guides I would have never managed to learn how to use the UI, learn about the game in depth and in general how the game works.
Even more, when you'll go to do some pvp you will need so many windows open in order to get max possible relevant information you barely got enough space to see your ship, the entire "clicky" part can be minimized in combat to overview and keyboard shortcuts Fx combos to activate modules.

I've tried to introduce people into eve and no one got past the tutorials or first 3 days, always the same > they watch the trailers... the read about all the amazing things you can do and then boom... excel in space.
Organic Lager
Drinking Buddies
#257 - 2014-05-13 17:19:00 UTC
Ramona McCandless wrote:
Organic Lager wrote:


Yes, you're right, of course. Suicide ganking someones ship has never caused a player, new or old, to leave eve. (This is sarcaism)


And this is important because...?

Is EvE special in some way that we should be pandering to those who dont like it?

When someone tries to play, for the sake of argument, CoD, and gets killed because they find the controls difficult or dont understand the game mechanics and quits, should EA change that game to suit them?

No, that would be stupid.

By the same yardstick if some one cannot tell that a 30,000EHP Proc is a ship that will more likely survive a gank than a 10,000 EHP Retriever, then this game is too hard for them.

I have no wish for it to be easier for people who cannot understand this concept.


It's important because the topic is "why isn't eve more popular".

EA works very hard to ensure that the controls and game play of CoD are easy to use and understand. They wade players into the game by starting in the shallow end and slowly working towards the deep end.

CCP on the other hand drops a child into a shark tank and wonders why he gets eaten alive.
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#258 - 2014-05-13 17:25:40 UTC
Why is EVE not more popular?

1) Subscription. The cost structure which amounts to $150-$180 a year, per account, is a bit steep for many.

2) Time to train and meaningful loss. My sons-in-law like to buy a game for $40 at midnight on the day it is released, play it all night, then run round LOL shooting in the face all the people that actually slept and didn't start playing until 8AM. Within a couple week or a month, when the advantage of not sleeping has been replaced with getting shot in the face as often as you shoot others in the face, they need to move on to whatever the next new game is.

When I tell them about EVE and how you are expected to play for years (or even decades), with long-term development and goals, they have no interest.

3) The player base itself. Despite the long-term planning inherent in the game's design, there are still too many people that play it for "LoL, I shot you in the face".

4) Finding it "ain't all that". The mega fleet fights that are supposed to be awesome are really not much fun. For those of us that created a long-term plan, worked to build a tight-nit group of friends and put in the hours to be able to claim a solar system of our own, a cloaky camper parks himself in your kingdom 23.5x7, and there is nothing you can do about it. I spent years getting to this level of game play to put my flag in the ground... only to have it nullified by someone that logs in, presses cloak, and heads off to work??? Really?

Vivec Septim
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#259 - 2014-05-13 17:57:15 UTC
I agree with having better AI for NPC encounters. +1

I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. 

Harry Forever
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#260 - 2014-05-13 18:05:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Harry Forever
the only thing the developers need to add are huge battles, they already tested it with the carrier event... they need to make it a given fact that randomly pirate NPC carriers spawn all over the galaxy, high low and nullsec, with this, new players will be able to see bigger fights right from the start and are able to join without much effort

the main reason most of the player come to eve is the big fights, however at the moment those are not accessible, incursions you need to be in a fleet and those fleets lock you out if you are new, nullsec not working either, because there are no big battles every day, at least not for a newb because they are unable to find or attend those

its way to difficult to find one when you are new, too many hurdles, joining corps, incursion channels etc. if you are new, you got no clue where to go, however if their would be frequent CONCORD Broadcasts to let everybody know where a pirate NPC carrier spawns, maybe even a carrier fleet from time to time, people would go there to kill it, you could have a big battle every hour in the game, without much programming done, good for the players to get into the game and have some action

thats all the people want, people want to see those 1000 ships on the grid