These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Vivec Septim
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#261 - 2014-05-13 18:06:56 UTC
Harry Forever wrote:
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, whit 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


I like where this guy is going.

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

Tux Gallant
KOR Resources
#262 - 2014-05-13 18:20:36 UTC
Vivec Septim wrote:
Harry Forever wrote:
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, whit 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


I like where this guy is going.


frequent large battles are fine however the economy would have to be adjusted to make that possible.
Its hard to have high value assets that take much game time to acquire and frequent battles at the same time.
If you blow up my ship how soon should I be able to return to a battle with a new one?
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#263 - 2014-05-13 18:26:44 UTC
Tux Gallant wrote:

If you blow up my ship how soon should I be able to return to a battle with a new one?


Dont fly what you cant afford to lose.

"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

Lugalbandak
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#264 - 2014-05-13 18:31:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugalbandak
Well , most games i had most fun with are "unpopular"

for me eve its the sand and the rules with it.

good tey working on newbie experiance , i was just lucky i ran in a group of guys when i just started who didnt say: go mine that veldspar or shoot red crosses.edit:(not that i prolly will do that long anyway but you get the point , its really the multiplayer aspect thats makes the different weather you are in a corp with 5 dudes or some big alliance doesnt matter)

and your point on faction warfare OP, the last RL person i succsful introduce with eve and still playing is a college of mine and i trw him under the bus with FW so that might work , get him evryday in fleets and explained fits

Then suddenly you log in and you hear , Lugal lugal , wtf my first kill MY FIRST KILL(some lousy fw farner fit but what the hell) and those moments is a "I WON EVE" for me(see above sand&multiplayer)

not that crap of pay to win and more account xbox blabla wich was mention before


srry for the crappy english

The police horse is the only animal in the world that haz his male genitals on his back

Tux Gallant
KOR Resources
#265 - 2014-05-13 18:34:04 UTC
Ramona McCandless wrote:
Tux Gallant wrote:

If you blow up my ship how soon should I be able to return to a battle with a new one?


Dont fly what you cant afford to lose.


I am afraid you fail to see my point in that question.

If a battle is worth having doesnt it require a loss of assets of good value? you cant have assets of good value if you loose them every other day. In the mean average that is.

So simply put you cant have high stakes battles often because then the stakes would lower or everyone would run out of assets.
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#266 - 2014-05-13 18:54:05 UTC
Tux Gallant wrote:


frequent large battles are fine however the economy would have to be adjusted to make that possible.
Its hard to have high value assets that take much game time to acquire and frequent battles at the same time.
If you blow up my ship how soon should I be able to return to a battle with a new one?


You have - quite unwittingly, I'm sure - touched upon one of the key reasons PvE will probably never be that much "better" in Eve.

You know what PvE players like about PvE?

They don't lose their ships. That's it. That's the draw.

Even the hardest PvE content in the game can be reduced to a fairly basic routine that guarantees against loss.

As long as that's the prevailing expectation held by PvE players, you're not going to be able to make PvE content "more interesting" without doing more harm than good. Just look at some of the absurd suggestions in this thread - I think I saw someone mention other pirate factions executing incursions, for instance.

Are incursions interesting? No, not really. They're speed-farmed ISK generators, the completion of which has been reduced to a science. So what, precisely, would be the benefit of adding a few new flavors? A few weeks of adapting fits to compensate for different EWAR flavors before those, too, are reduced to a science and speed-farmed with no risk of loss. Long term benefit to the game, or even specifically to the "interestingness" of PvE? Just about zilch.

As long as PvE is inherently predictable and trivially manageable, it will never be more interesting, but if you were to break the paradigm of predictable PvE such that occasionally, even seasoned veterans will lose ships now and again to PvE content, you're going to unleash a floodgate of tears the likes of which have never been seen.


Don't believe me? Head on back to December and find just about any thread about Ghost sites. I've never seen such a ridiculous cavalcade of entitled whinging and bedwetting hysterics.

"I fight SLEEPERS with my Tengu and I took it in a ghost site and it DIED and that's WRONG, why does CCP hate PvE!?!?!?"

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

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

Lugalbandak
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#267 - 2014-05-13 18:58:30 UTC
good that tey are commited probers / cloackers / suicede fleets , can you imagen you hadnt those , so no effort req.

wich brings my point , eve isnt popular cause its need effort , wich makes it real popular for the guys who are playing it

The police horse is the only animal in the world that haz his male genitals on his back

SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#268 - 2014-05-13 19:01:47 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:



Don't believe me? Head on back to December and find just about any thread about Ghost sites. I've never seen such a ridiculous cavalcade of entitled whinging and bedwetting hysterics.

"I fight SLEEPERS with my Tengu and I took it in a ghost site and it DIED and that's WRONG, why does CCP hate PvE!?!?!?"



And I'll add to this: Ghost sites themselves are, in fact, members of the "predictable PvE" paradigm, and it's downright trivial to put a ship together that can just go ahead and soak the damage so that you needn't even be overly concerned with the timer.


So, they didn't even break the mold in that regard - they were just different enough that many players threw tantrums about how much CCP hates PvErs because, heavens to Betsy, they lost a ship!

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

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

Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#269 - 2014-05-13 19:37:01 UTC
The question in the OP is wrong. The question isn't "why isn't EVE more popular". That question has been answered by every poster who has detailed all of the themepark features and mechanics that EVE Online lacks.

The real question is this: If you Need those kinds of things to enjoy a game and just have to have it in a future/space setting, why are you here (in EVE Online, a game that doesn't have those things) instead of HERE (a game that does have all those things you say you want)?
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#270 - 2014-05-13 19:38:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Ramona McCandless
Jenn aSide wrote:
The question in the OP is wrong. The question isn't "why isn't EVE more popular". That question has been answered by every poster who has detailed all of the themepark features and mechanics that EVE Online lacks.

The real question is this: If you Need those kinds of things to enjoy a game and just have to have it in a future/space setting, why are you here (in EVE Online, a game that doesn't have those things) instead of HERE (a game that does have all those things you say you want)?


I feel the question could be:

"Why don't you feel its popular enough?"

Also arg my eyes/wallet/mind etc

"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

SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#271 - 2014-05-13 20:04:26 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Eterne
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Erufen Rito wrote:

It's easy to give AI a way to screw us over without making it a 2nd Concord.
Make them self rep. Make them remote rep. Make them primary high DPS or logi, instead of randomly switching. Make them change their primaries more often, to put preasure on logi cap and self cap. Make them gain transversal. Make them find soft targets and alpha them off the field.

Right now, they will orbit whatever they are shooting and that's that. Not much of a challenge.


Incursion rats do most of those things.

And people still have number crunched that down into being farmed en masse.

PVE is not a challenge, it's a formula. Once the formula is figured out, it's just a gear check, pardon the phrasing.



Yep - and like I said before, if it ever actually became a legitimate challenge, PvE players would absolutely revolt. Right now it's a low-approaching-zero risk, mid-high reward activity. Do you really think the people who enjoy that would react kindly to a risk upgrade? Even with an accompanying reward upgrade (which would be HIGHLY unlikely), there's no way the ratio would be even in the same zipcode of what it is now.

They will gladly whine about PvE not being "interesting" enough all day, but see how they feel when their officer-fit marauder gets interestingly destroyed in a mission.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

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

Erufen Rito
The Dark Space Initiative
Scary Wormhole People
#272 - 2014-05-13 20:07:27 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Erufen Rito wrote:

It's easy to give AI a way to screw us over without making it a 2nd Concord.
Make them self rep. Make them remote rep. Make them primary high DPS or logi, instead of randomly switching. Make them change their primaries more often, to put preasure on logi cap and self cap. Make them gain transversal. Make them find soft targets and alpha them off the field.

Right now, they will orbit whatever they are shooting and that's that. Not much of a challenge.


Incursion rats do most of those things.

And people still have number crunched that down into being farmed en masse.

PVE is not a challenge, it's a formula. Once the formula is figured out, it's just a gear check, pardon the phrasing.

I've never seen an incursion rat pull transversal on me on purpose.

I've never run an incursion fleet that REQUIRED for the logi to be cripled to become doable. There is a difference between efficiency and ability to finish. I've never once seen an incursion fleet alpha soft ships when the rest of the players are on the ball. Incidentally, I have been volleyed off the grid by players, even when my logi was on the ball.
Incursions are a bad example to use, because the DPS they dish out vs the ammount of ships is not proportional to the size of the fleet they are expected to face. I am saying incursions are too easy. They were easy when they came out, and they are easy now.

This is as nice as I get. Best quote ever https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4137165#post4137165

SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#273 - 2014-05-13 20:16:13 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Eterne
Erufen Rito wrote:
I've never once seen an incursion fleet alpha soft ships when the rest of the players are on the ball.


Nor can that realistically happen. Assuming even remotely matched PvP fleets with even vaguely competent FCs, at least a few losses on each side are virtually guaranteed by way of alpha pops.

Guaranteed losses will never, ever fly in PvE.

Hell, they threw a 50 page tantrum about losing ships in a live event a few months back.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

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

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#274 - 2014-05-13 20:21:53 UTC
Erufen Rito wrote:

Uh, yeah. Learn to logi, because "out of nowhere" is far, far off the mark.


I suppose you didn't read what I wrote.

Neutral reps come from a character with no affiliation to the war target. That's the whole point.

Quote:

I want PVE that tosses curve balls varied enough to not become a pattern. It's easy to do. Pokemon did it back whenver it launched.


No, it did not. Pokémon was beyond easy.

You will never get that in EVE, either. They shoot, or they don't shoot. They rep, or they don't rep. They can't use Amnesia to boost their SP stat before they cast Blizzard, they are incredibly binary, stupid bots. This is by necessity, so that something as inarguably unimportant as freaking PVE doesn't cause server lag.

If you want something else, play a different game.

"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.

Neutrino Sunset
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#275 - 2014-05-13 20:28:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Neutrino Sunset
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
You know what PvE players like about PvE?

They don't lose their ships. That's it. That's the draw.
This is an erroneous generalization. While it can sometimes be useful to categorize players into PvPers and PvEers it must surely be pretty obvious to everyone here that those categories encompass players with a multitude of different attitudes. It must also be equally obvious that the majority of Eve players both PvE _and_ PvP to varying degrees, which alone makes the generalization nonsensical.

The mechanism of total loss affects both PvP and PvE similarly, so I think that most of us that have played Eve long term probably do so in part because we enjoy the thrill of the risk we take, whether that's in PvP _or_ PvE.

Some will say, and have said here, that there is no risk in PvE at all. That's misguided. If you have an experienced crew of the optimal number of pilots in the optimal ships then it's true that you have minimised the risks, but accidents still happen. But if you are trying to run Incursions for the first time, with a skeleton crew or players in suboptimal ships, or attempting to solo wspace content, then you sometimes have as much chance of getting spanked by NPCs as you have of getting ganked by players (or you should!). Exploration deep in hostile space is still PvE, but risky nonetheless. As much as it is possible it is risks like that which I would like to see apply to _all_ PvE.

Either way, the notion that all PvPers are chill with the idea of losing ships while anyone who PvEs can't take it seems as arrogant as it is asinine.

Jenn aSide wrote:
The question in the OP is wrong. The question isn't "why isn't EVE more popular". That question has been answered by every poster who has detailed all of the themepark features and mechanics that EVE Online lacks.

The real question is this: If you Need those kinds of things to enjoy a game and just have to have it in a future/space setting, why are you here (in EVE Online, a game that doesn't have those things) instead of HERE (a game that does have all those things you say you want)?
No, I don't believe that those identifying features from lesser risk MMOs that Eve lacks are even remotely on the right track of why Eve is not more popular.

I think instead that Eve has a certain group of players, who see themselves as hardcore PvPers, who will choose to interpret any proposed change or improvement to the PvE side of the game as a desire to make PvE easier, hence the use of derogatory terms like 'themepark features and mechanics', remarks like SurrenderMonkey's above, and links to Hello Kitty Online or whatever. I get the impression that this is primarily an attempt to belittle anyone who PvEs, although what purpose they think this might serve I wouldn't care to guess.

However, if you read the thread carefully you notice that in the OP what I actually suggested was that making PvE _much_ _harder_ and ideally closer in mechanics to PvP itself, would make it more engaging, and consequently Eve more popular. No mention of making it any easier at all.

And while there have been several posters that have chosen to interpret "getting killed when they weren't expecting it" as "griefing", there are always some of those, but in the main I haven't seen anyone suggesting that Eve in general, or PvE in particular, needs to be made easier, so I don't really see why the 'cool PvP' crowd need to be going on about that quite so much when that's neither the topic nor what anyone is suggesting.
Erufen Rito
The Dark Space Initiative
Scary Wormhole People
#276 - 2014-05-13 20:33:13 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Erufen Rito wrote:

Uh, yeah. Learn to logi, because "out of nowhere" is far, far off the mark.


I suppose you didn't read what I wrote.

Neutral reps come from a character with no affiliation to the war target. That's the whole point.

Quote:

I want PVE that tosses curve balls varied enough to not become a pattern. It's easy to do. Pokemon did it back whenver it launched.


No, it did not. Pokémon was beyond easy.

You will never get that in EVE, either. They shoot, or they don't shoot. They rep, or they don't rep. They can't use Amnesia to boost their SP stat before they cast Blizzard, they are incredibly binary, stupid bots. This is by necessity, so that something as inarguably unimportant as freaking PVE doesn't cause server lag.

If you want something else, play a different game.

Neutral logi gets a flag now, so it is no longer neutral. Unless they changed this again. Not like it matters, since it only applies to hisec anyway.

It is kind of cute how you are deliberatedly missing my point here, and calling out such a terrible combo to use for your Magikarp. Pokemon wasn't easy. Sure you could whipe out, rage, toss the gameboy, have the batteries fall off, rage some more because you last saved 2 towns back, and carry on. It requried you to think a bit outside of the box, because of all the meta behind it. I wont school you on it, but find about EVs and IVs and stuff. You will end up massaging your brain with EFT after a few pages. Argue whatever you want, it wasn't seen often. And I guess I should've gone with a less over the top aproach. Programing attack patterns that are effective is not hard whatsoever. You just need to have a set of somethings that work, designed to **** on our cherios.

Are you that scared of losing your shiny incursion ship? I mean, you are behemintly opposing a raise in difficulty for your isk faucets. Sounds to me like it is you who needs to try a different, safer game. I heard Star Citizen will respawn your ships if you play on career mode or whatever it's called. I'm sure that will tickle your fancy.

Thanks for your sound advice, I mean playing a different game is not something us eve players do from time to time.

This is as nice as I get. Best quote ever https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4137165#post4137165

SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#277 - 2014-05-13 20:34:05 UTC  |  Edited by: SurrenderMonkey
Neutrino Sunset wrote:


Either way, the notion that all PvPers are chill with the idea of losing ships while anyone who PvEs can't take it seems as arrogant as it is asinine.


Take it up with the army of 'bears that lose their **** when they unexpectedly lose a ship. Problematically for your position, that this is a problem for them is an actual fact, regardless of how asinine you personally feel that may be.

I'll ignore the part where, like any intellectually dishonest forum troll, you went full strawman by converting "PvE-ers" (i.e., "People who identify as PvE players") into, "anyone who ever does any PvE at all", btw. I mean, I'll ignore it except for observing that you did that.

I'm nice like that.

It should be pretty obvious that, "People who do some PvE to support their PvP habit" are an entirely different class of player.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

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

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#278 - 2014-05-13 20:41:27 UTC
Erufen Rito wrote:

Neutral logi gets a flag now, so it is no longer neutral. Unless they changed this again. Not like it matters, since it only applies to hisec anyway.

It is kind of cute how you are deliberatedly missing my point here, and calling out such a terrible combo to use for your Magikarp.


Not Magikarp, Snorlax. That was the move combo that got it banned from competitive play after the first National Pokémon League tournament.


Quote:
Pokemon wasn't easy.


It was if you weren't 12, yeah. Now, Dragon Warrior 2, Original Edition? That game was rough. There are at least 2 points where you can permanently lose the game, and it was pretty open world, so you could wander into a high level zone pretty damn easily and get wiped out for lulz.

Quote:
Sure you could whipe out, rage, toss the gameboy, have the batteries fall off, rage some more because you last saved 2 towns back, and carry on. It requried you to think a bit outside of the box, because of all the meta behind it. I wont school you on it, but find about EVs and IVs and stuff.


Ok, let me school you on it instead.

That game was ****ing easy. Especially if you figured out that critical hits bypassed most elemental resistances, so Venusaur (which I nicknamed Peenusaur) could be easily used to clear 4/5ths of the entire game.
Quote:

You will end up massaging your brain with EFT after a few pages. Argue whatever you want, it wasn't seen often. And I guess I should've gone with a less over the top aproach. Programing attack patterns that are effective is not hard whatsoever. You just need to have a set of somethings that work, designed to **** on our cherios.

Are you that scared of losing your shiny incursion ship? I mean, you are behemintly opposing a raise in difficulty for your isk faucets. Sounds to me like it is you who needs to try a different, safer game. I heard Star Citizen will respawn your ships if you play on career mode or whatever it's called. I'm sure that will tickle your fancy.

Thanks for your sound advice, I mean playing a different game is not something us eve players do from time to time.


What "attack patterns"? The rats either shoot back or they don't. It's binary.

I'm not opposed to raising the bar, that'd be fine. I'm opposed to wasting time with something that will be math hammered into being marginalized in weeks, when they could be using that dev time to fix real issues.

"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.

ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#279 - 2014-05-13 22:11:18 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Ramona McCandless wrote:
Anyone here do cyno? Yes, no?
Yes, in the cheapest piece of junk frigate that can fit the cyno and can hold the fuel.
In essence, something a new player can easily do, but in general doesn't know is one of the myriad options of things to do in EvE.
That's why I (and fortunately others as well) sometimes take the time and hang around in a new player systems talking to, well, new players. Pointing them at the near endless possibilities this game has. Of course a lot are newly started alts, but quite often there are new people that are open to the sandbox.

Is it boring to do as opposed to the things I normally do in game? Oh yes, definitely. Is it rewarding? Again, oh yes. (And no, not in Isk or km's or new corp slaves to smack about!!!X)
I can recommend every seasoned EvE player to do so once in a wile. Just help the newbro's on their way. Not to make an interesting evening, far from it actually, but an interesting EvE future for years to come.

Forgive for my personal opinion on the matter, now on to more technical forum business:

I have removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them. As always I let some edge cases stay.
Please people, keep it on topic and above all civil!

The Rules:
3. Ranting is prohibited.

A rant is a post that is often filled with angry and counterproductive comments. A free exchange of ideas is essential to building a strong sense of community and is helpful in development of the game and community. Rants are disruptive, and incite flaming and trolling. Please post your thoughts in a concise and clear manner while avoiding going off on rambling tangents.


4. Personal attacks are prohibited.

Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.


5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.


19. All posts must be related to EVE Online.

Posts regarding other companies and products or services are prohibited and any content of this nature will be removed. Posts regarding other games are however permitted on the Out of Pod Experience forum for the purposes of discussion only.


26. Off-topic posting is prohibited.

Off-topic posting is permitted within reason, as sometimes a single comment may color or lighten the tone of discussion. However, excessive posting of off-topic remarks in an attempt to derail a thread may result in the thread being locked, or a forum warning being issued.



Thread reopened.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Erufen Rito
The Dark Space Initiative
Scary Wormhole People
#280 - 2014-05-13 22:17:21 UTC
Wow, there went the discussion we were having. I guess comparing Eve with games is not a good idea, because a quick lookover can gt the entire thing nicked.

This is as nice as I get. Best quote ever https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4137165#post4137165