These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Why are people leaving? and wjhat can we do about it?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mag's
Azn Empire
#141 - 2014-07-09 10:56:41 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Mag's wrote:

All I'm saying is, sure I know we don't share playstyles. But the use of such terms, tends to negate the message one is trying to put forward.

I know as I have done it a couple of times and it will simply illicit bad responses.

Eve has always been about conflict and allowing everyone to interfere with everyone else's game play. It's as close to a sandbox game we can get without it being unplayable chaos. To then call those taking part in aspects you don't and expect CCP to remove then or nerf them out of the game, seems to me rather naive.

I don't start playing chess, then complain about how certain pieces are allowed to move. I learn how to move them in a way that will outsmart my opponent. If I do, I'm sure they would feel rather frustrated. But that doesn't then mean they or I, should request a change.
I wouldn't also label anyone playing chess a murderer. But it's goal is regicide.

The only toxic nature I have seen in Eve, is through either local chat or Evemails, after killing someone. Should I care for them? Or should I care for those that have asked questions after and wanted to know how to avoid dying in future?

You talk of risk and claim gankers have little. But isn't this also the responsibility of those being ganked? That's at the very heart of the sandbox nature of Eve, CCP want pilots to create content and add their own protection. It's also an MMO, so it stands to reason that people will join together to shoot others. So therefore shouldn't those being shot stand together to stop it?
You wish for them to have more risk, give them what you wish for. Many are already shoot on sight, although there are other ways to add risk.

I've never understood the idea that other people in Eve, shouldn't be allowed to interfere with or as you say 'ruin' another players game. It's an MMORPG that specialised in PvP in practically every aspect of game play. One could even argue that the counter in ship spinning, turned that into a competitive thing.
So why play Eve if all you want is that solo experience? You can even get it here, if you really wanted. The test server would be ideal for such purposes.


We agree on that point. I don't want any freedom nerfed. All I am saying is that the rules are tilted in favor of those who wish to take from others. I would like to see incentives in place for those who would aid and support each other.

Give standings more of a role in the world. Those with high standing with a pirate faction should default to those npc corps instead of empire corps. Give anti-pirates their own Npc Corp that makes those two groups always at war.

There isn't much the PvE runner can do to increase the gankers risk or reduce his own further. No significant price exists to punish bad behavior. Without meaningful penalties that can be applied to losing the fight on both sides the incentive will rest on the side having fun at the expense of others.

I don't seek to limit the activity of anyone, I want options to inflict meaningful damage upon those who currently enjoy a risk free environment at the expense of their prey. I don't want to be a victim, nor do I want to join the predators in victimizing others. If they don't care about blowing up I want to be able to do something to them that they do care about, or at least have the chance for that fight to reward me with something of value to me-- their continued absence or some temporary security, or something that lets me enjoy my playstyle just as they enjoy theirs at my expense.
But when you talk of increasing penalties, you seem to be asking for CCP to do it through game mechanics. That in of itself, is an attempt to nerf freedom and limit certain peoples activities.

Where you and I differ, is that I see a sandbox with a small set of rules and many tools. I then play the game with that collection and make my own fun. I accept others may do things that stop that.
You see a game with rules and tools and then play your style. But you see people playing it in a way you don't like that interferes with your style and suggest they have more penalties through game mechanics from CCP.

But that's not the Eve sandbox. Sure there are some rules, this is what stops it becoming chaotic. But CCP expect the playerbase to make the rest. What I mean is that if you think there are not enough penalties, risk and meaningful damage given via the games own mechanics, then add them yourself.

You again talk of players like myself, having fun at the expense of others. But we play Eve knowing full well it's a game with a limited rules set, set in a sandbox type environment. Like I said, you don't start playing chess, then complain the pieces move a certain way.
It seems to me others play a sandbox game with a specific set of rules, then constantly request that the rules grow and grow to make interaction with them all but impossible. Well if that came to pass, it wouldn't be Eve any more.

The issue I have with what you are saying comes down to this.
You can play your playstyle. You can enjoy your game. But you are responsible for protecting it and making sure that others don't take it from you. It's not CCPs responsibility, it's yours.

As Daichi so kindly quoted CCP Solomon. The risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Velicitia
XS Tech
#142 - 2014-07-09 11:32:41 UTC
Xocomo wrote:

It is plain to see the weekly averages have consistently trended significantly downward recently. This is a very worrying trend. We're seen PCU averages last seen in 2008. You can't spin this or troll it. The player-base is leaving the game without a drastic change I think eve will be done before the 3rd decade.


First, don't forget that the numbers on eve-offline are daily averages.

This drop happens every year from about mid/late June to about mid/late August. It's called "summertime".

Many people are getting away on vacation, and enjoying the nice weather -- ESPECIALLY after the bullshit "polar vortex" mess that many of us had to deal with.

This past weekend was Independence Day in the USA. Holiday weekend means that lots of people were with their family, and had long skills training (i.e. not able to log in).

Uni students are working 9-5 jobs like the rest of us (though you'll also see similar, though less drastic, drops around mid-terms and finals).



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
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#143 - 2014-07-09 12:54:43 UTC
Mag's wrote:
[quote=Mike Voidstar]But when you talk of increasing penalties, you seem to be asking for CCP to do it through game mechanics. That in of itself, is an attempt to nerf freedom and limit certain peoples activities.

Where you and I differ, is that I see a sandbox with a small set of rules and many tools. I then play the game with that collection and make my own fun. I accept others may do things that stop that.
You see a game with rules and tools and then play your style. But you see people playing it in a way you don't like that interferes with your style and suggest they have more penalties through game mechanics from CCP.

But that's not the Eve sandbox. Sure there are some rules, this is what stops it becoming chaotic. But CCP expect the playerbase to make the rest. What I mean is that if you think there are not enough penalties, risk and meaningful damage given via the games own mechanics, then add them yourself.

You again talk of players like myself, having fun at the expense of others. But we play Eve knowing full well it's a game with a limited rules set, set in a sandbox type environment. Like I said, you don't start playing chess, then complain the pieces move a certain way.
It seems to me others play a sandbox game with a specific set of rules, then constantly request that the rules grow and grow to make interaction with them all but impossible. Well if that came to pass, it wouldn't be Eve any more.

The issue I have with what you are saying comes down to this.
You can play your playstyle. You can enjoy your game. But you are responsible for protecting it and making sure that others don't take it from you. It's not CCPs responsibility, it's yours.

As Daichi so kindly quoted CCP Solomon. The risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built.


Not at all, beyond the addition of a way for me to ruin the day of someone who does not care about ISK, his ship, or security status. All I want is him gone for longer than it takes him to reship. I don't care about a kill board, I am uninterested in the endless game of not engaging a proper combat vessel unless it's already under the guns of a mission room, etc.

I want to fight him off, and force him to stay gone for a predictable period of time, preferably several hours to a day. Denying him the ability to attack me while I play ruins his day.

That is the standard by which I feel a fight is won. I don't mind defending myself, but there is zero point to engaging anyone. There is nothing to win. The moment I am forced to stop doing what I want in the sandbox and start doing what you want, I have lost. I can achieve nothing but a pointless victory or expensive loss. The only sensible thing to do is log off and play a game with a goal I feel like achieving. That is why people leave. They want to play a game, and a shocking minority want to play the victim.

Yes, despite some chest beating PvP player's claims, PvE was intended to be a major part of the game. It just never got finished. The interdependencies only really go one way.

The focus of PvP almost exclusively being on non-combat ships is the issue. There are plenty of people looking for a fight, but most only want it with those who cannot fight back.

They don't want to play chess unless the game begins with all your pieces removed except your King. The PvE parts of the game are designed to force me to enter the game in that condition, forcing me to concede every match or play something else entirely.
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#144 - 2014-07-09 13:08:41 UTC
@Kaarous Aldurald,

Things you don't agree with are not lies.

I want options added for me to limit the aggressions of repeat attackers. I want to inflict a *meaningful* penalty on those who wish to disrupt my chosen playstyle.

ISK, ship loss, and security status mean nothing to the people who wish to fight me, most of the time. They are just out harrasing people because it's funny. I don't want CCP to stop them. I want CCP to enable me to stop them.

They can inflict PvP on me at will, which is the name of the game... But why should they get all the fun? Why should they be able to do as they please without meaningful penalty? If nothing I can do will achieve the goal I am after, I may as well leave. They win. It's pointless.
Ryuu Towryk
Perkone
Caldari State
#145 - 2014-07-09 13:21:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Ryuu Towryk
To be blunt, Eve is stagnant. There just isn't any new, appealing content. I would love to live in null, but that means dealing with politics between the two biggest power blocs. Lowsec is just a wasteland, though it can be somewhat fun dodging bubbles and gatecamps. High sec is just plain boring. God forbid we were to ask for/get new pve content. It just seems that large parts of the game are completely cut off from casual players and the rest is tedium.

Eve's becoming less fun for me.
Seldjan
Cryptologix Inc.
#146 - 2014-07-09 13:27:43 UTC
to the op:

Well it's clear this game isn't for you.

EVE is shrinking atm, but not for the reasons you gave.

PS if you can teach me how to PLEX 5 accounts without paying a penny as you mention, I can teach you how to enjoy this game with low SP characters. (Feel free to convo me for that service).

However, if you lack the ability to dream and think outside the box you will never enjoy EVE, I warn you now.
Gavin Dax
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#147 - 2014-07-09 14:59:48 UTC
Just want to say I think Mike Voidstar has outlined some of the problems (or at least the opinions of one side) pretty well.

HS is just overall pretty boring. And it's where new players start. And they're mislead to believe it's a safe place. The rules and gank mechanics are not explained anywhere in the tutorial afaik. Since this seems like an obvious thing to do, I think there's a chance this was intentional (i.e. a non-negligible number of new players wouldn't find the gank mechanics appealing if they were explained properly, as there is no rewarding way to fight back against pirates in HS). This lack of knowledge also helps to add game content for HS pirates, at the expense of the newer and/or poorly informed players, so there is a plus and negative side to it.

If you want a more balanced gameplay experience where you can have more freedom to fight back against your aggressors in a rewarding way, you need to move to low/null. That's not easy for a new player to do... it's a lot easier to make ISK in HS (which is a problem) unless you are part of a larger entity, so low/null does not seem like a good option for many newbies. There's wormholes as well, which TBH a lot of these types of players probably do go to, because they fit that play-style the most (you can make a lot more ISK and that makes up for any ganks anyway if you don't want to defend yourself, or if you do want to defend yourself you have reasonable options to do so that are rewarding). But WHs are not easily accessible for new players alone for a variety of reasons. And PvP in them can be rare too, if that's what you're looking for (I imagine it can get pretty quiet sometimes in a WH, although I've never really spent large amounts of time in one). Maybe this last point isn't true though.

Anyway, just my 2 cents.
Gully Alex Foyle
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#148 - 2014-07-09 15:06:23 UTC
Gavin Dax wrote:
Just want to say I think Mike Voidstar has outlined some of the problems (or at least the opinions of one side) pretty well.

HS is just overall pretty boring. And it's where new players start. And they're mislead to believe it's a safe place. The rules and gank mechanics are not explained anywhere in the tutorial afaik. Since this seems like an obvious thing to do, I think there's a chance this was intentional (i.e. a non-negligible number of new players wouldn't find the gank mechanics appealing if they were explained properly, as there is no rewarding way to fight back against pirates in HS). This lack of knowledge also helps to add game content for HS pirates, at the expense of the newer and/or poorly informed players, so there is a plus and negative side to it.
I posted an idea to improve this in F&I.

CBA to find it Lol but it was about introducing advanced tutorial missions, that basically made you perma-suspect in highsec.

To accept them, you would need a 'vet sponsor' to 'sign-in' too and help you out.

If you survived, both you and the vet would get ISK.


The concept boiled down to: include a sort of PVP in the tutorials, and give vets something more socially useful to grind ISK than, say, ratting.

Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#149 - 2014-07-09 15:22:08 UTC
@ mike voidster

ppl can and do defend themselves from other players whilst PvE'ing.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#150 - 2014-07-09 15:44:11 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
@Kaarous Aldurald,

Things you don't agree with are not lies.

I want options added for me to limit the aggressions of repeat attackers. I want to inflict a *meaningful* penalty on those who wish to disrupt my chosen playstyle.

ISK, ship loss, and security status mean nothing to the people who wish to fight me, most of the time. They are just out harrasing people because it's funny. I don't want CCP to stop them. I want CCP to enable me to stop them.

They can inflict PvP on me at will, which is the name of the game... But why should they get all the fun? Why should they be able to do as they please without meaningful penalty? If nothing I can do will achieve the goal I am after, I may as well leave. They win. It's pointless.



The fact that the 'penalty' doesn't hold meaning for you is immaterial. It holds meaning within the scheme of the game.

And this game gives you many many ways to fight back , to defend yourself without fighting and to avoid a fight all together.

7 years I've played and not fallen victim to a gank.

Of course when the gankers scan my current mission ship (Machariel) they find it rigged with shield resist rigs, with a Damage control, with ECM drones ready to launch, an MJD (actually it's dual propped , the after burner isn't jsut for speed and tank, it's in case a ganker scrams me shuttting off my mjd) with a neut in the high slot (to break a scram which may be preventing me from using my MJD). It also helps that my mach's fit value is below the cost of the number of common ganks ships (Tornados/Catalysts) it would take to kill me.

I can almost feel the gankers thinking "ah, F$%^ that, lets find something easier". I trade a miniscule amount of isk/hour for "a, f%$@ that". THAT is how one should play a game with mechanics such as this.

Your lack of ability to achieve the goal you want has nothing to do with game mechanics, it's a lack of will, imagination and ability to make small sacrifices.
Iain Cariaba
#151 - 2014-07-09 15:44:56 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
I don't want CCP to stop them. I want CCP to enable me to stop them.

There are already a myriad of methods to stop the big bad gankers from ganking you. All it takes is searching the forums for the term 'ganking' and reading any of the threads. Mixed among the calls to nerf everything not carebear and to HTFU are all the methods you need to defend your chosen playstyle, provided that playstyle isn't an afk one. All it takes is a little effort on your part.
Gavin Dax
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#152 - 2014-07-09 15:54:04 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
@ mike voidster

ppl can and do defend themselves from other players whilst PvE'ing.


I think his main point though was that the options are mainly lose and not lose. There isn't really a "win", at least not in HS, or if there is it's a lot harder to come by than in low/null. And that there's a disconnect between PvE and PvP that inherently makes it more difficult to fight back (not just in HS). This in turn reduces the probability of an engagement, which is less fun for everyone (but probably moreso for the side that's on the defensive).
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#153 - 2014-07-09 15:58:43 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:


They don't want to play chess unless the game begins with all your pieces removed except your King. The PvE parts of the game are designed to force me to enter the game in that condition, forcing me to concede every match or play something else entirely.


Then why is it NOT forcing me (or any other good PVE player) to do the same?

I'm not starting from a handicap, when I pve (especially in high sec) , i recognize that the cards are stacked in MY favor:

-playing the way i play i don't get CONCORDED, the people would would try to gank me would.

-if people want to get me that have to suicide multiple ships OR pay isk to war dec me, I don't incur those costs for shooting at NPCs

-If they do come after me (whether or not they kill me), they also incur sec status penalties which means that have to then take specific actions to fix that situation (repair sec status) or avoid the consequences (dodge faction police).

-If they shoot me 1st, I get to shoot them, which gives me a nice momento (kill mail) of the fact that I won.

I can further stack the odds in my favor by THINKING. For instance, warp core stabs.

"But my lock range" you say. Well, if you fly a missile/drone ship like a fleet Typhoon (which i use when there are a bunch of gankers flying around my Sister's of EVE mission systems) you realize that drone link augmented sentry drones and FoF missiles (note to CCP, i refuse to call them 'auto-targeting' lol) don't CARE about your lock range. They just kill stuff within your range. So I can mission in peace and if someone wants to gank me, they better have more than3 points of disruption (and gankers never do) , otherwise, it's 'see ya'.

This isn't mentioning all the other tools like Target Spectrum Breakers for battleships, or ECM bursts (outside of high sec), or what a well timed smart bomb blast does to the underwear of the inty pilot who got close enough to scram you (also outside high sec).

You want to tell me that you've exhausted EVERY potential counter to gankers there , Mike? Ok, prove it, evemail me the loss mail of your defensively fit PVE ship that got ganked.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#154 - 2014-07-09 16:02:11 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:
I don't want CCP to stop them. I want CCP to enable me to stop them.

There are already a myriad of methods to stop the big bad gankers from ganking you. All it takes is searching the forums for the term 'ganking' and reading any of the threads. Mixed among the calls to nerf everything not carebear and to HTFU are all the methods you need to defend your chosen playstyle, provided that playstyle isn't an afk one. All it takes is a little effort on your part.


You can even do it afk (this example is in null, it can be done as well in high sec if you know what you are doing) lol.

Alas, I bolded the part that makes what you said an impossibility for some.
Gavin Dax
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#155 - 2014-07-09 16:02:22 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:
I don't want CCP to stop them. I want CCP to enable me to stop them.

There are already a myriad of methods to stop the big bad gankers from ganking you. All it takes is searching the forums for the term 'ganking' and reading any of the threads. Mixed among the calls to nerf everything not carebear and to HTFU are all the methods you need to defend your chosen playstyle, provided that playstyle isn't an afk one. All it takes is a little effort on your part.


Again, I think he means "enable me to stop them in a way that is rewarding to my play-style". Or something like that. In low/null you can form a fleet, or bait, etc. and that can be rewarding in that you can win, and not just "not lose". Now, I don't know whether or not this is what HS should be, but clearly many new players don't like it (and I can see why). The mechanics are pretty boring, at least for one side, which is usually the one that new players are on or at least introduced to initially.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#156 - 2014-07-09 16:10:08 UTC
PvE is very disconnected from PvP, definitely.

How is there not a 'win'? if u complete the site or mission u get paid. thats a win and u get paid whether PvP happens or not.

Get past the thinking that ur entitled to run PvE unmolested and the idea that u should be paid more because u defended urself from another player. The rewards u get from a site already factor the risk of interference from other players.

Thats exactly why hi-sec pays less than low sec, Null and WH's.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#157 - 2014-07-09 16:11:09 UTC
Gavin Dax wrote:
Daichi Yamato wrote:
@ mike voidster

ppl can and do defend themselves from other players whilst PvE'ing.


I think his main point though was that the options are mainly lose and not lose. There isn't really a "win", at least not in HS, or if there is it's a lot harder to come by than in low/null. And that there's a disconnect between PvE and PvP that inherently makes it more difficult to fight back (not just in HS). This in turn reduces the probability of an engagement, which is less fun for everyone (but probably moreso for the side that's on the defensive).


This is untrue. Ask the guy who has for the last few weeks BAITED gank fleets into smashing themselves into his bastion Golem in lanngisi ( he'd linger on the station in a bling fit to make sure he got scanned, warp to a Depot, switch out to super tank then go into his mission, i suspect he had a link ship in system too).

You don't need to fight back (though i tend to fit a neut so i get on the kill mail lol), you need to survive while CONCORD kills for you.
Arla Sarain
#158 - 2014-07-09 16:22:36 UTC
1) EVE is what you make it to be
...and new players have nothing to make of it.


2) This game has a poor way of indicating whether your decision is good, or bad. Not morally, I am fully aware that it's not good or bad that matters, but choices and consequences that do. However, don't get your hard ons for the "butterfly" effect. It's not as fascinating as it sounds. Especially for a new player.

3) Can a new player become a pirate? Sure. Is it a good idea? Probably not. Is there a good chance the new player will do it by accident? Kind of, yeah.

This game is plagued by little transparency, for something that is meant to be a sandbox, players come in and have no clue what to do.

And it's not a matter of tutorials to explain it. All you can explain with tutorials is the mechanics and operators of the game. Unless you wish to spoonfeed them.

People that stay, do so out of curiosity. If I had a tad less time, I wouldn't have stayed for the six months I've played this game up until this day.

Sorry, but after watching The Escapist review, I kind of agree with Yahtzee. EVE is just different way to grind. Because all the sandbox features are locked out by ISK.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#159 - 2014-07-09 16:53:18 UTC
Arla Sarain wrote:

This game is plagued by little transparency, for something that is meant to be a sandbox, players come in and have no clue what to do.

And it's not a matter of tutorials to explain it. All you can explain with tutorials is the mechanics and operators of the game. Unless you wish to spoonfeed them.


cant see the forest for the trees, or rather ur looking for a forest that isnt even there.
Its not a lack of transparency, its a lack of hand holding. Players come here and expect to be told what to do and where to go by NPC's. These players have missed the point completely. Ur supposed to make ur own destiny, not follow a path. There is no, 'this is what u should do next' there is only, 'what do u want to do next?'

New players have everything to make of this game.


Arla Sarain wrote:

Sorry, but after watching The Escapist review, I kind of agree with Yahtzee. EVE is just different way to grind. Because all the sandbox features are locked out by ISK.


Like?

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Ioci
Bad Girl Posse
#160 - 2014-07-09 17:09:05 UTC
A lot of people don't know how much High Sec has been nerfed. It's possible even Development doesn't know how bad High Sec has been nerfed. All for agenda and it worked. There is no chance of a new entity to ever contest power in EVE.

Every renter out there is thinking the same thing. I will live under this boot and grow strong and one day I will rise up and smash the overlord. You really think the overlord wasn't planning for that?

What doe this have to do with people leaving? People aren't as stupid as some would like you to believe. Just because they can't put it in a troll proof thread doesn't make it any less true. Nobody logs in to a video game to be someone elses content and the ones who stay simply slipped through the cracks. I've never really been a target for this sort of thing myself but it's because I have sucked at EVE for 8 years. I did so because I knew as soon as I stopped sucking at EVE I would become a target and by and large most people see this. They don't want to play a game where they need to suck to be able to play the game. To be 'allowed' to play the game.

R.I.P. Vile Rat