These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

Core skills negatively impact the new player experience

First post
Author
Moosha Andedare
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#21 - 2014-05-11 20:11:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Moosha Andedare
I think something that the slippery slope arguments ignore is that part of the novelty of skills is that they represent a choice. SP is a resource that builds over time and you have a bit of a control over that resource with things like implants and remaps, but that's as far as it goes.

The problem with core skills is that there aren't any situations where you don't want them. They're so important and necessary for flying any ship in the game that they might as well not exist. Other skills like weapon upgrades involve some kind of meaningful choice. For example if you're planning to go into industry or trade there's not much of a benefit to be gained from them. But try to find a career path for a new player that doesn't benefit from core skills in any way, and you'll see what I mean.

Without the element of choice -- where based on your early experiences with the game and a desired career / gameplay path you decode which skills are worth getting and prioritize accordingly -- skills become a meaningless and artificial barrier.

That's why I think it's okay to follow the OP's proposal for core skills, as there's a clear line you can draw that avoids the slippery slope argument of getting rid of all skills.

We already give new players a certain amount of SP. Why not give them enough to have all the core skills to lV or V? What level of meaningful gameplay do we lose by letting them start at V instead of III?

I can tell you the way I felt a few weeks into this game was "I wish I had created an account 3 months ago and just let it run until now." Coincidentally it took me about three months before I started actually enjoying the game play and didn't feel completely gimped when doing basic new player activities. CCP was lucky enough that I'm persistent and that I happened to be busy enough with work that I ended up waiting out the three months. Now I have two paying accounts and will probably end up with more down the road.

I came very close to can calling after my first month of subscription, and in fact two of the friends I started the game with already quit for that exact same reason. Had they had the skills you get 3 months into the game, I'm pretty sure they would still be playing.
Khadhir Hashul
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#22 - 2014-05-12 07:50:35 UTC
Moosha Andedare wrote:
I came very close to can calling after my first month of subscription, and in fact two of the friends I started the game with already quit for that exact same reason. Had they had the skills you get 3 months into the game, I'm pretty sure they would still be playing.


I find it funny that EVE is one of those games where people think they can go 'we didn't want those players anyway' or 'you need to do [insert specific task here] for three months' in response to an argument like this. I've had at least five people quit on me because of the skill system.

I always laugh a little whenever I hear CCP's getting its talent poached or being forced to lay off another fifty people, because the only way it's surviving is by underpaying wide-eyed fans (according to CCP's balance sheets, their salary expenditure per capita is around $55,000 a year, less than Iceland's GDPPC in 2007). They're screwed the moment their secretaries form a union, unless they think up a way to get people to make three cyno alts.

Not that anything's going to change until the community's toxic 'working as intended' mentality changes, of course.
Gully Alex Foyle
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2014-05-12 09:52:15 UTC
Khadhir Hashul wrote:
I find it funny that EVE is one of those games where people think they can go 'we didn't want those players anyway' or 'you need to do [insert specific task here] for three months' in response to an argument like this. I've had at least five people quit on me because of the skill system.

Not that anything's going to change until the community's toxic 'working as intended' mentality changes, of course.

There's nothing wrong about making a hardcore game that discourages casual gameplay and just isn't for everybody.

Moar players doesn't necessarily mean either a better game or more profits for CCP. Having a strong and unique vision seems to have worked better for the past 11 years.

Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!

Khadhir Hashul
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#24 - 2014-05-13 04:14:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Khadhir Hashul
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:
Khadhir Hashul wrote:
I find it funny that EVE is one of those games where people think they can go 'we didn't want those players anyway' or 'you need to do [insert specific task here] for three months' in response to an argument like this. I've had at least five people quit on me because of the skill system.

Not that anything's going to change until the community's toxic 'working as intended' mentality changes, of course.

There's nothing wrong about making a hardcore game that discourages casual gameplay and just isn't for everybody.

Moar players doesn't necessarily mean either a better game or more profits for CCP. Having a strong and unique vision seems to have worked better for the past 11 years.


Less players mean no game at all.

Or no updates, at the very least, which for a game like EVE would be death sentence.

edit: Also, I've already elaborated on this. How is a casual version of Farmville 'hardcore'?
Neus
Dylenta Industries
#25 - 2014-05-13 12:03:26 UTC
Khadhir Hashul wrote:
How is a casual version of Farmville 'hardcore'?


This game has a different approach and it's not for everyone. Complaining about every point of view that is different from yours will not bring anything further to your cause. It's evident that many people disagree with your presentation; not particularly the need for it to be reconsider, but nor did you provide a level headed explanation based on input from others.

If you think about it, new players also leave the game for other reasons. Reading outrageous rantings of how new players don't get advantages, when to be honest Eve Online has listened openly and is looking to revamp the new player experience.

Your point of view has been noted and the need for you to argue seems to go beyond the game itself (i.e. Farmville)

*Looks around*

"Moderator? Can we get a moderator please...? We have a customer who seems to have lost their DAMN MIND and needs help finding it!" :P

u Command / Crew Log**[/u] - https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=344446&find=unread

Neus
Dylenta Industries
#26 - 2014-05-13 12:24:10 UTC
Moosha Andedare wrote:


I can tell you the way I felt a few weeks into this game was "I wish I had created an account 3 months ago and just let it run until now." Coincidentally it took me about three months before I started actually enjoying the game play and didn't feel completely gimped when doing basic new player activities. CCP was lucky enough that I'm persistent and that I happened to be busy enough with work that I ended up waiting out the three months. Now I have two paying accounts and will probably end up with more down the road.

I came very close to can calling after my first month of subscription, and in fact two of the friends I started the game with already quit for that exact same reason. Had they had the skills you get 3 months into the game, I'm pretty sure they would still be playing.


So what your saying is that you almost stopped playing because you were impatient and this style of play didn't suit the previous MMO's you've played, but your friends did...Ok, obviously the issue of paying for 3 months didn't seem to bother you as the OP who originally posted tried to make the case because now your looking at getting multiple accounts.

CCP I am sure feels so very thankful and lucky they have your support and not the two friends that don't have the patience like you do...very proud of you...now go get cleaned up for dinner...

Is this thread become some "come cry on my tissue"? I mean really, can there possibly be a presentation worth a damn if your going to go on and on about how new players deserve more? This has nothing to do with appeasing veterans of the game, this has nothing to do with cost per how long you can be efficient to compete. All this has to do, from as far as I have read, is a baseless rant regarding the fact genuine new players can't get into the game faster....

How would you suggest, under your said system for new players, they would fare in the mix of skilled strategists already here?

How would you prevent swarms of veterans taking advantage of your new system?

Sounds like a CEO of a Corporation wants an easy way to create fast alts or a system to build a corporation built around quantity over quality. This fact I am basing off the weak attempt to present your claim.

Frankly, you opened this up and presented your initial idea, to not further work with the community around some of those who are flat against you or those who partially see your point...you've now leaned into ranting and quoting anyone who presents their fair opinion on a lack luster effort you started.

You're as much of the problem in this thread as those you've sarcastically snorted at!

u Command / Crew Log**[/u] - https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=344446&find=unread

Gully Alex Foyle
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#27 - 2014-05-13 12:53:33 UTC
Another couple of points.

First is: as far as actual gameplay is concerned, SP makes very little difference. Lvl 4 missions are exactly the same gameplay as Lvl 1, mining in a hulk is exactly the same as mining in a venture, PVPing in a battleship is very similar to PVPing in a frigate (tactics differ obviously, but it's still warp/move/target/point/shoot/repair etc.).

Second is: if you're playing with others, SP isn't so important. No gang or fleet will say no to an extra tackle, scout or dps. Yes, FCs will say 'f*k off' to somebody that has the SP for a HAC but doesn't want to fly one because he's lazy or risk-averse, but I've never heard an FC say that to an enthusiastic and reasonably smart newbro that just wants to help and get involved with the 'big boys'.

SP seem to matter most to solo players, but this is an MMO.

Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!

Revolution Rising
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#28 - 2014-05-14 06:18:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Revolution Rising
Jawls Rohn wrote:
I'd be in favour of a little tinkering. Stick AWU behind WU4 instead of 5, for instance.

Not entirely related, but the destroyer/BC skill split was pretty bad from a new player perspective, I think. If it had to be done, it should have been accompanied by making the racial BC skills lower ranked.

However, I'm broadly happy with the skill system as is. What's most important is that new players are educated by other, more experienced players about how you don't have to have many 5s to be useful.

I wouldn't object if CCP gave new players an additional leg up though.


TBH I'd be behind a lot of tinkering.

These people are not "some guy just up from the surface". They are podpilots.

If CCP has deemed for instance that the core skills to fly a rifter are "such and such" why not start new pilots WITH THOSE SKILLS who are minmatar ? Level 3 mastery of the rifter or some other frigate would not be out of line imo.

I will still hurt them so severely that they will quit the game in shame with a PILGRIM (in caps!) anyway.

Start them along their racial path and stop trying to gimp everyone else ?

Their lack of experience will still get them owned - no matter how much you change the game itself - you cannot give them experience.

.

Anthar Thebess
#29 - 2014-06-26 12:39:13 UTC
I think , new characters.
First on each account , during creation should get a possible scheme to choose:
- miner
- industry
- hauling
- gunnery specialist
- missile specialist
- drone specialist

This will be good for eve:
- new players will be capable of doing something
- more players -> more fun for others / more isk for ccp
De'Veldrin
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#30 - 2014-06-26 13:33:56 UTC
Cerise Chan wrote:
Even the lower ships like t1 frigs and t1 destroyers can hardly be fit properly without having high engineering skills.

The waiting time for training until you can fly something that can actually be a threat to <2009 accounts is huge


The number of ganks done by characters less than a month old to characters significantly older than that suggests that you are talking out of your ass.

Character skill is much, much less important that player knowledge of how to apply that skill effectively. And that can only be learned by actually playing the game.

You can see the effects of giving people too much too fast on killboards all over. Some dude buys a bunch of PLEX, buys a shiny high skilled character, buys a shiny blinged out pirate battleship, and promptly flies into lowsec and gets popped like a tool. It happens frequently. Why? Because PLEX can buy you a lot of things, but experience with how to effectively apply all those skill points you have is NOT one of them.

The skill system is slow because it gives new players precisely that - time to figure out what all those damned skill points are really doing for them. The problem is that instant gratification crowd that sees that vital experience as a burden rather than a benefit.

De'Veldrin's Corollary (to Malcanis' Law): Any idea that seeks to limit the ability of a large nullsec bloc to do something in the name of allowing more small groups into sov null will inevitably make it that much harder for small groups to enter sov null.

Gully Alex Foyle
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2014-06-26 13:48:02 UTC
Khadhir Hashul wrote:
Less players mean no game at all.

Or no updates, at the very least, which for a game like EVE would be death sentence.
This 'argument' pops up in almost every thread. It's an incredibly silly argument because:

1) it has nothing to do with the gameplay

2) it could be used to support basically anything, from pink Hello Kitty style spaceships ('just think of all the little girls that would sub!!!') to hardcore avatar p0rn ('just think of all the pervs that would sub!!!')

3) while anybody that has played for a couple hundred hours can have something interesting to say about EVE - the game, nobody except CCP management has enough information to make meaningful comments on EVE - the business


TL;DR: Please focus on good ideas for better gameplay, not crap ideas just 'to get moar subs'.

Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!

Iain Cariaba
#32 - 2014-06-27 20:01:42 UTC
Google "Malcanis' Law"
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
#33 - 2014-06-29 00:19:59 UTC
Min/Maxer tears. Good.

The Tears Must Flow

Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2014-07-02 22:08:19 UTC
I don't support this idea. The reasons have been well stated already, highest one being the Gank fleets.

On the other hand . . .

I do like the idea of character choice mentioned earlier.

Even add 'tackle' as one of the initial professions.

m

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)

Shiloh Templeton
Cheyenne HET Co
#35 - 2014-07-03 12:37:28 UTC
Quote:
People are meant to play a game for fun, and barriers to entry like this do nothing but make new players, opening whatever guides they find for the first time, decide 'oh well, I'm not playing this game for that long anyway'.
When I started Eve the incredibly deep, varied & long skill queue was one of the biggest attractions to the game. It creates a real sense of goal setting and a meaningful reward for making a choice in the game of what to train next.

I also think you're overstating the need for Core skills to all 5's. 3's and 4's are quick - and usually a ship only begs for a 5 in a particular skill. I definitely don't think Navigation skills should be handed out like candy. They are a real choice in the game that should not be watered down.

I agree that keeping paying players benefits us all, but I don't think your proposal is the way to go. I mean, what's next -- free monocles for all??
Gallowmere Rorschach
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#36 - 2014-07-10 14:51:25 UTC
Anthar Thebess wrote:
I think , new characters.
First on each account , during creation should get a possible scheme to choose:
- miner
- industry
- hauling
- gunnery specialist
- missile specialist
- drone specialist

This will be good for eve:
- new players will be capable of doing something
- more players -> more fun for others / more isk for ccp

This idea is actually pretty solid. Not only does it solve a little of the day zero pain, it gives new players the ability to test out the various things the game has to offer before committing to a given path. Yes, I know, that's what the current starter area missions are for, but even with those, you're looking at a couple of days training for each, which feels like a lot to a new player. With this proposal, it's as quick as make another character, pick a new path, log in, start the feels.

It also avoids Malcanis' Law in it's most extreme form. This is because most older players rolling alt accounts are going to stuff their heads with high end implants anyway (ones new players can't afford), which means that said alts would only have a day or two advantage at most, when compared to the current system. Not much, when you consider that said alts are usually purpose built, and focus trained.
Iain Cariaba
#37 - 2014-07-10 18:01:09 UTC
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:
With this proposal, it's as quick as make another character, pick a new path, log in, start the feels.

Thus is the flaw. There's already so much whining over alleged throw-away alts that this would make the carebear population's heads explode in indignation.
Gallowmere Rorschach
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#38 - 2014-07-11 01:23:13 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:
With this proposal, it's as quick as make another character, pick a new path, log in, start the feels.

Thus is the flaw. There's already so much whining over alleged throw-away alts that this would make the carebear population's heads explode in indignation.

I can see that point, but to be quite frank, what doesn't make their heads explode? People make "throw-away alts" now. How would a day or two worth of training time make that any worse?
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir.
#39 - 2014-08-07 14:59:35 UTC
If it were to be done, I'd support the removal of the increase ships PG/CPU fitting skills. They're short but also so mandatory they're pointless. Ships should just have the grid and CPU.

Alek the Kidnapper, Hero of the CSM

Sean Apollo
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#40 - 2014-08-08 13:00:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Sean Apollo
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:
If it were to be done, I'd support the removal of the increase ships PG/CPU fitting skills. They're short but also so mandatory they're pointless. Ships should just have the grid and CPU.


Why take away something that's such big part of the game though? Eve is a game of time the more time you put into it the better you become. If someone chooses to use his/her time to train fitting skills then he should have more fitting options.

Here's an example:
Pilot 1 has decided he want to use time to get his fitting skills up

Pilot 2 has chosen to train gunnery skills and can now use t2 guns.

Both these pilots meet in low sec in a plex both have the same PvP experience and are both using the same ship. Being brawler fits they go at each other. pilot 2 is tearing through pilot 1's shields and is about to get into pilot 1's armor, when he gets there it is taking quite a long time to make a dent in his armor while his own armor tank is dropping faster, why? Because pilot 1 trained fitting skills he was able to squeeze on a 1600 plate and fit T2 hardeners. Pilot 2 had a very tight fit and had to do a 800 plate and meta 4 hardeners to be able to fully fit his ship.

So what's my point? My point is the impact of the different skills. It adds so much variety and makes the game more fun.

Imagine if we were talking about gunnery support skills. It makes a huge impact to the experience of eve, and adds so much variety. I think you would only hurt the game by removing them.

Sorry for the long post, I hope I was able to make my point.

Most people hate me...

Previous page123Next page