These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 do players stay in npc corps?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1121 - 2015-05-29 20:38:51 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:

You keep relying on this data as if it has no flaws.


The data is not flawed merely because you don't want to face the truth that it presents.



The data is not flawed merely because you don't want to face the truth it presents as I see it.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1122 - 2015-05-29 20:44:59 UTC
Syn Shi wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:

You keep relying on this data as if it has no flaws.


The data is not flawed merely because you don't want to face the truth that it presents.



The data is not flawed merely because you don't want to face the truth it presents as I see it.


"as I see it".

Gotta keep pushing that agenda, huh carebear?

"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.
Aza Ebanu
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1123 - 2015-05-29 20:45:43 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:

I just linked a post to this effect earlier today. You can also watch CCP Rise's talk from Fanfest on using science to increase player retention. Why are people on these forums so untrusting?



Because maybe CCP Rise was a pirate style solo PVPer? They shouldn't put people with such a bias in such a position in game development. Maybe him and his ideas are why people don't join player corps, and why they unsub? Maybe they should let a more group minded player develop and balance content for EVE Online?
Yuri Ostrovskoy
Doomheim
#1124 - 2015-05-29 20:47:49 UTC
Why do I stay in this Npc Corp? Simply because you people have nothing to offer me. Yall have nothing that I want, and no matter how pretty a picture you try to paint, ya ain't pulling me into your ranks.
Demerius Xenocratus
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1125 - 2015-05-29 20:48:56 UTC
Sibyyl wrote:

Wardecs are content.





Only for one side. The people being wardecced either watch their retriever get melted by a proteus every time they undock until they run out of ISK, or they just don't undock for a week.

The manner in which wardecs are generally conducted makes them extremely uninteresting for the target in almost every case.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1126 - 2015-05-29 20:50:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Joe Risalo
So, I went to the Dev blog with the CCP rise comment that everyone keeps quoting.
funny enough, if you click the Eve Dev link under his pic, this is the very next comment that shows up.

CCP Rise wrote:
Vincent Athena wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
The strongest indicators for a new player staying with EVE are associated with social activity: joining corps, using market and contract systems, pvping, etc.

Have you shown cause and effect here? That is, is the cause of the players leaving the game their lack of social activity? Or is it that the players who have no interest in social activity find this is not the game they were looking for, and move on?


Simple answer is no. The closest come, for now, to establishing cause is to simply ask using exit surveys or other similar feedback channels. Otherwise we are doing the best we can with correlation.

As a funny side note: one of the stronger indicators for whether or not someone sticks with EVE is whether or not they used combat drones during their first 30 days. Maybe using drones is just so awesome that they decide to sub right then and there?! Or maybe it's just correlation related to depth of engagement. You be the judge!



To simplify this comment for those whom are hard headed, he's stating that the data shows a link, not a cause.

This is not different than saying that Players who were ever in space (remember, you start in space) are more likely to stay with Eve.

So again, it's correlation not causation.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1127 - 2015-05-29 20:51:45 UTC
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:

Only for one side.


Getting blown up is content every bit as much as blowing up someone else.

"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.
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1128 - 2015-05-29 20:53:47 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Syn Shi wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:

You keep relying on this data as if it has no flaws.


The data is not flawed merely because you don't want to face the truth that it presents.



The data is not flawed merely because you don't want to face the truth it presents as I see it.


"as I see it".

Gotta keep pushing that agenda, huh carebear?



All it took was 4 words to show there is no substance to your words. That was an easy win.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1129 - 2015-05-29 20:56:44 UTC
Syn Shi wrote:

All it took was 4 words to show there is no substance to your words. That was an easy win.



Spin all you like, you can't escape the statistics.

"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.
Yuri Ostrovskoy
Doomheim
#1130 - 2015-05-29 20:58:18 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Syn Shi wrote:

All it took was 4 words to show there is no substance to your words. That was an easy win.



Spin all you like, you can't escape the statistics.


Wait a minute, CareBears are supposed to share. Why isn't anyone sharing? Where's my free ISk by daily mail? Ship parts? Hell, veldspar? No one? Anyone? Huh, guess being a CareBear isn't as cracked up as they think it is.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1131 - 2015-05-29 21:16:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Joe Risalo
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:


Spin all you like, you can't escape the statistics.



I will again quote CCP Rise, as you so do, since you like to be so keen on how statistics supposedly show pure "facts".


CCP Rise wrote:
Vincent Athena wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
The strongest indicators for a new player staying with EVE are associated with social activity: joining corps, using market and contract systems, pvping, etc.

Have you shown cause and effect here? That is, is the cause of the players leaving the game their lack of social activity? Or is it that the players who have no interest in social activity find this is not the game they were looking for, and move on?


Simple answer is no. The closest come, for now, to establishing cause is to simply ask using exit surveys or other similar feedback channels. Otherwise we are doing the best we can with correlation.

As a funny side note: one of the stronger indicators for whether or not someone sticks with EVE is whether or not they used combat drones during their first 30 days. Maybe using drones is just so awesome that they decide to sub right then and there?! Or maybe it's just correlation related to depth of engagement. You be the judge!


Again, he's saying it's a correlation that could very well mean nothing.


Edit... Note where he says that using combat drones is a STRONGER INDICATOR, towards retention. STRONGER than social interaction.

Edit 2... For the sake of clarification, I'm not sure if CCP Rise is stating stronger than social interaction, or is one of the stronger indicators under social interaction.
CCP Rise would have to clarify that, but the point still stands that the numbers don't really prove anything.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#1132 - 2015-05-29 21:30:39 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
So again, it's correlation not causation.

We all know it is a correlation - we are not idiots. But this correlation, and the others they found in their dataset provide strong support for their view that the retention of new players strongly depends on the social bonds and social interactions that new players make. It certainly doesn't provide evidence for your position which seems to be that NPC corps are great as is and couldn't possibly be the cause of players leaving the game.

Take a step back man. You are projecting your Eve experience on the new player experience for everyone joining the game. You are arguing that CCP should make no effort increasing the social and sandbox integration because you are quite happy living in an NPC corp. That is just a downright bizarre position to take.

You are right the data doesn't speak for a single player - it is a collection of data from the behaviour of over 80 000 trial accounts and in aggregate, those that don't integrate in the sandbox are less likely to subscribe. That doesn't say that no one who stayed only in an NPC corp never subscribed, or that joining a player corp is a sure-fire way to retain a new player, but just that overall, these socially connected players are more likely to continue playing.

Maybe CCP is doomed to failure but trying to get more players socially engaged seems like a reasonable strategy to increase player retention. Even without the hard data, any reasonable outsider would accept this proposition, and in the face of the compelling data CCP Rise and CCP Quant have talked about recently, it really makes sense for them to focus some effort on increasing the exposure of new players to social and sandbox interactions.

Quit being pedantic and arguing that new players should be "left alone" or that player interactions are bad because they haven't done all the acceptable double-blind studies and exit interviews to convince you they can read the mind and motivations of every player. Stop arguing that opportunities for social interactions for new players should be ignored when all the data CCP has talked about says the opposite just because you really like living in an NPC corp.

All the data points to the increased retention rate for players who leave NPC corps, engage in social interactions, participate in wardecs or even that are ganked. How many thousands of players have started the trial, mined for two weeks by themselves while in the NPC corp where nothing interesting happened, and just quit the game out of boredom? We can only speculate, but CCP has access to that data and it is telling them that it is far too many. CCP are convinced that social interactions, both friendly and hostile, make these trial players engage with the game and stay, so expect more changes to nudge players towards each other in the future.





The 8 Golden Rules of Eve

Why Do They Gank?
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1133 - 2015-05-29 21:46:26 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:
So again, it's correlation not causation.

We all know it is a correlation - we are not idiots. But this correlation, and the others they found in their dataset provide strong support for their view that the retention of new players strongly depends on the social bonds and social interactions that new players make. It certainly doesn't provide evidence for your position which seems to be that NPC corps are great as is and couldn't possibly be the cause of players leaving the game.

Take a step back man. You are projecting your Eve experience on the new player experience for everyone joining the game. You are arguing that CCP should make no effort increasing the social and sandbox integration because you are quite happy living in an NPC corp. That is just a downright bizarre position to take.




So, I stopped reading right here, because it again shows that you're taking my comments out of context.
You're ignoring all other comments I've made in an attempt to push the agenda of making high sec PVP more viable and more forced onto players in NPC corps.

Go back and read my comments.

I've quoted CCP Rise stating, in a nut shell, that the statistics don't really prove anything.

I've also said that despite this, CCP Rise would likely say that any increase to social activity would be good for the game regardless of increasing player retention.

I have also stated that increasing training and content provided to newbros will increase retention and is as important, if not more important, than social interaction, at least in the beginning.


Forcing actions, such as war, onto NPC corps is not the solution to an unproven issue.
That, in fact, is projecting YOUR preferences on the NPE.

Y'all seem to keep saying that I'm forcing my play style onto everyone else, by taking my comments out of context, and then turn around and state what you want forced upon other players.

"I want more combat in high sec." "I don't want players to be safe from war in NPC corps." "I don't want casual corps." "I don't want casual players."

You, and many other people on here, have been saying nothing more that "my way or the highway" and then turn around saying that myself (and others who wish to keep NPC corps how they are), are the ones trying to force our agenda.

We don't want NPC corps to change... YOU want it to change to something more suitable for YOU.
So, who's the one trying to force what now?
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1134 - 2015-05-29 21:49:46 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:
So again, it's correlation not causation.

We all know it is a correlation - we are not idiots. But this correlation, and the others they found in their dataset provide strong support for their view that the retention of new players strongly depends on the social bonds and social interactions that new players make. It certainly doesn't provide evidence for your position which seems to be that NPC corps are great as is and couldn't possibly be the cause of players leaving the game.

Take a step back man. You are projecting your Eve experience on the new player experience for everyone joining the game. You are arguing that CCP should make no effort increasing the social and sandbox integration because you are quite happy living in an NPC corp. That is just a downright bizarre position to take.

You are right the data doesn't speak for a single player - it is a collection of data from the behaviour of over 80 000 trial accounts and in aggregate, those that don't integrate in the sandbox are less likely to subscribe. That doesn't say that no one who stayed only in an NPC corp never subscribed, or that joining a player corp is a sure-fire way to retain a new player, but just that overall, these socially connected players are more likely to continue playing.

Maybe CCP is doomed to failure but trying to get more players socially engaged seems like a reasonable strategy to increase player retention. Even without the hard data, any reasonable outsider would accept this proposition, and in the face of the compelling data CCP Rise and CCP Quant have talked about recently, it really makes sense for them to focus some effort on increasing the exposure of new players to social and sandbox interactions.

Quit being pedantic and arguing that new players should be "left alone" or that player interactions are bad because they haven't done all the acceptable double-blind studies and exit interviews to convince you they can read the mind and motivations of every player. Stop arguing that opportunities for social interactions for new players should be ignored when all the data CCP has talked about says the opposite just because you really like living in an NPC corp.

All the data points to the increased retention rate for players who leave NPC corps, engage in social interactions, participate in wardecs or even that are ganked. How many thousands of players have started the trial, mined for two weeks by themselves while in the NPC corp where nothing interesting happened, and just quit the game out of boredom? We can only speculate, but CCP has access to that data and it is telling them that it is far too many. CCP are convinced that social interactions, both friendly and hostile, make these trial players engage with the game and stay, so expect more changes to nudge players towards each other in the future.







Summary
We all know it is a correlation...but we will state otherwise anyways.
Wendrika Hydreiga
#1135 - 2015-05-29 21:51:55 UTC
In social sciences, a correlation as little as 0.30 in a sample of 20 people is enough to publish an article based in it. Now dismissing a good correlation on a sample as big the entire playerbase of EVE is a bit foolish if you ask me.

Maybe surviving new players use drones because the ones that subscribe past the trial often skill to Mining Barges, which are for all intents and purposes, droneboats. And that's okay because mining is a good, if dull, stepping stone for bigger and more exciting experiences in the sandbox. And maybe the ones that go further past than that stick to NPC corps after bad experiences with player owned corps, or remain as highsec carebears and deny the PvPers their "gfs". Which leads to why the PvPers would rather they'd join the big named corporations, so they have more warm bodies to shoot at.

No way to know for sure. Oh well!
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1136 - 2015-05-29 21:54:48 UTC
Syn Shi wrote:
Black Pedro wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:
So again, it's correlation not causation.

We all know it is a correlation - we are not idiots. But this correlation, and the others they found in their dataset provide strong support for their view that the retention of new players strongly depends on the social bonds and social interactions that new players make. It certainly doesn't provide evidence for your position which seems to be that NPC corps are great as is and couldn't possibly be the cause of players leaving the game.

Take a step back man. You are projecting your Eve experience on the new player experience for everyone joining the game. You are arguing that CCP should make no effort increasing the social and sandbox integration because you are quite happy living in an NPC corp. That is just a downright bizarre position to take.

You are right the data doesn't speak for a single player - it is a collection of data from the behaviour of over 80 000 trial accounts and in aggregate, those that don't integrate in the sandbox are less likely to subscribe. That doesn't say that no one who stayed only in an NPC corp never subscribed, or that joining a player corp is a sure-fire way to retain a new player, but just that overall, these socially connected players are more likely to continue playing.

Maybe CCP is doomed to failure but trying to get more players socially engaged seems like a reasonable strategy to increase player retention. Even without the hard data, any reasonable outsider would accept this proposition, and in the face of the compelling data CCP Rise and CCP Quant have talked about recently, it really makes sense for them to focus some effort on increasing the exposure of new players to social and sandbox interactions.

Quit being pedantic and arguing that new players should be "left alone" or that player interactions are bad because they haven't done all the acceptable double-blind studies and exit interviews to convince you they can read the mind and motivations of every player. Stop arguing that opportunities for social interactions for new players should be ignored when all the data CCP has talked about says the opposite just because you really like living in an NPC corp.

All the data points to the increased retention rate for players who leave NPC corps, engage in social interactions, participate in wardecs or even that are ganked. How many thousands of players have started the trial, mined for two weeks by themselves while in the NPC corp where nothing interesting happened, and just quit the game out of boredom? We can only speculate, but CCP has access to that data and it is telling them that it is far too many. CCP are convinced that social interactions, both friendly and hostile, make these trial players engage with the game and stay, so expect more changes to nudge players towards each other in the future.







Summary
We all know it is a correlation...but we will state otherwise anyways.


Yup, and guess what... 100% of people that get cancer have drunken water at some point in their life.
I guess this means water causes cancer.

I know you and I understand that these correlations could potentially mean nothing.
Perhaps these other guys will eventually stop trying to use them to bash NPC corps?
Not like though...
Aza Ebanu
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1137 - 2015-05-29 22:01:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Aza Ebanu
Shailagh wrote:
Im trying to make ccp money here. They have data that shows people that stay in npc corps quit more often. They said corp ceos dont like recruiting noobs cuz of fear of awox, do you believe this is the main reason?

I believe people stay in npc corps (and therefor quit more often) to evade wars.

Are wars the most dangerous aspect to retention (players staying in npc corps) and therefore should be nerfed to increase player corp levels and retention?

Nerf wars to save the noobs and make people join player corps to increase retention and ccps wallet?

Wars don't add anything to the game. More mature players have moved to WH, null or low sec, while alting it up in high sec. War decs only exist to harass new players because, they are a high sec mechanic. Good game design would have made more of it than that.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1138 - 2015-05-29 22:03:50 UTC
here's another correlation that can be used to further express my point of how useless the data can potentially be.

Anyone here watch Gold Rush?

You take pan samples of dirt that shows a projected value of 15 ounces per yard....
That's a damn good number!!!

So, you process 1,000 yards of dirt.
Will you get 15,000 ounces?

Again, correlation is no different than speculation, only with numbers.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#1139 - 2015-05-29 22:05:21 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
Syn Shi wrote:

Summary
We all know it is a correlation...but we will state otherwise anyways.


Yup, and guess what... 100% of people that get cancer have drunken water at some point in their life.
I guess this means water causes cancer.

I know you and I understand that these correlations could potentially mean nothing.
Perhaps these other guys will eventually stop trying to use them to bash NPC corps?
Not like though...

Wow, when will you guys stop parroting that simplistic line. Correlations are used all the time to support hypotheses much more radical than "social interactions keep players in a social MMO game".

CCP has a massive dataset which they have mined backwards and forwards and are confident enough in there interpretation of the data to have CCP Rise stand up and present these findings to the world at Fanfest. You can put your head in the sand and call him incompetent or a liar, but that doesn't change the direction in which CCP is going to take this game.

Getting new players out of NPC corps and into player corps is now an important goal for CCP. I guess you are just going to have to deal with that.

The 8 Golden Rules of Eve

Why Do They Gank?
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1140 - 2015-05-29 22:08:57 UTC
Aza Ebanu wrote:
Shailagh wrote:
Im trying to make ccp money here. They have data that shows people that stay in npc corps quit more often. They said corp ceos dont like recruiting noobs cuz of fear of awox, do you believe this is the main reason?

I believe people stay in npc corps (and therefor quit more often) to evade wars.

Are wars the most dangerous aspect to retention (players staying in npc corps) and therefore should be nerfed to increase player corp levels and retention?

Nerf wars to save the noobs and make people join player corps to increase retention and ccps wallet?

Wars don't add anything to the game. More mature players have moved to WH, null or low sec, while alting it up in high sec. War decs only exist to harass new players because, they are a high sec mechanic. Good game design would have made more of it than that.



Well, it's not just to harass new players.
They also like to use it to harass miner, missioners, traders, and other non-direct PVP.

Though, some wardecs are used for good reasons.
I once used a war dec against a mining corp filled with alts that was mining every asteroid belt within 3 jumps, everyday.
9-10 characters, all with the same names and a number.

It was very likely that this person was macro-mining with these characters, as no human being has the tolerance or dedication to mine out several asteroid belts, on a daily basis, from down time to down time.

Though, we did suicide gank a few of his ships before we war decced him. the suicide ganks were enough to force him out of the system, but we wanted to make sure he stayed as far away as possible.