These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Ivant Sumboodi
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1441 - 2015-06-08 20:41:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Ivant Sumboodi
Lucas Kell wrote:
stuff
Black Pedro wrote:
CCP Rise said that less that a fraction of a percent of people who quit cite ship loss as the reason. How many multiples of that number were just bored out of the game?
How many of those people that state nothing? Is there even an option for that in the normal set of tickboxes, or is that something you have to pick "other" and type in. Even CCP themselves seemed to avoid making any concrete conclusions from that data.



I guess this does explain Incursions and the ridic payout, but did they have to sacrifice Industry to do it? I know the CODE cockroaches are more than happy to feed on the hapless, but it's depressing nonetheless. Also with population online and no newbies doing industrial stuff it just let's you know how centralized and controlled stuff is.


It's an old game so i guess "whatever".
Orion Nex
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#1442 - 2015-06-08 20:42:34 UTC
Ivant Sumboodi wrote:
Incursions broke the hi-sec ISK faucet. It's broke until they fix it. Industry is kind of a joke unless you're ancient.


Or just hate yourself
Ivant Sumboodi
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1443 - 2015-06-08 20:43:36 UTC
Orion Nex wrote:
Ivant Sumboodi wrote:
Incursions broke the hi-sec ISK faucet. It's broke until they fix it. Industry is kind of a joke unless you're ancient.


Or just hate yourself




"lol"
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1444 - 2015-06-08 20:44:12 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Lucas, it might be worth going back and listening to CCP Rise in that 2014 presentation again.

From those stats, the 40% that go into solo play missioning/mining, which the old tutorial system led them towards, also tended not to stay with the game for very long.

So there was the 50% that left within a month or so, 40% that tended not to stay very long and 10% that end up as long term retained players.
Yeah, that's my point. People are always saying "how can we turn that 40% into more for the 10%". What I'm saying is "what did that 40% want to do that can be improved so they stay on their own terms". To me they came in wanting a diverse PvE experience, and they got the barely passable red crosses and rocks that is EVE PvE. Make EVE PvE more varied and group friendly and they will get what they came for and likely stay longer.

Say for example you run a soup shop, and you sell an amazing chicken soup. You also sell a tomato soup from a tin.
50% of your walk ins don;t fancy soup and leave.
40% come in for tomato soup, but don;t come back because it's terrible.
10% come for the chicken soup and love it, returning every day.

Why try to find ways to make the 40% love chicken soup when you could simply make your tomato soup better? You've already done the hard part of getting them in the store, Now you just need to help them enjoy what they came in for.

Does that not make sense?

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1445 - 2015-06-08 20:44:49 UTC
Orion Nex wrote:

That's why I think ganking should be the danger in high sec. War decs would be to take over structures or something of high value.


I don't think any one thing should be "the" danger in highsec. (or just two things, either)

Only one thing is only one thing to watch out for. And I don't think it should be that simple, or that restricted.

"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.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1446 - 2015-06-08 20:50:18 UTC
Ivant Sumboodi wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
stuff
Black Pedro wrote:
CCP Rise said that less that a fraction of a percent of people who quit cite ship loss as the reason. How many multiples of that number were just bored out of the game?
How many of those people that state nothing? Is there even an option for that in the normal set of tickboxes, or is that something you have to pick "other" and type in. Even CCP themselves seemed to avoid making any concrete conclusions from that data.



I guess this does explain Incursions and the ridic payout, but did they have to sacrifice Industry to do it? I know the CODE cockroaches are more than happy to feed on the hapless, but it's depressing nonetheless. Also with population online and no newbies doing industrial stuff it just let's you know how centralized and controlled stuff is.


It's an old game so i guess "whatever".


Removing CODE. and all they do would not get more newbie into industry. What kills newbie with industry is how industry itself works. The vets are living off small margins the newbie needs weeks if not moth to get to even if they somehow instantly got the knowledge of how to.

Removing CODE. will not fix any "issue" with the game. Newbie need to be pushed toward any form of interaction with other players (yes players, not god damn alts) and this is true for every single "profession" in this game. Industry, mission, incursions, small gangs PVP, large fleet PVP,... This should all be geared toward taking new people to help you as opposed to one more "clone" of yourself.

You can't build ties to this game if all you do is play with yourself and the vast majority of player won't pay a monthly sub for a game they don't feel any attachment to.
Ivant Sumboodi
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1447 - 2015-06-08 20:50:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Ivant Sumboodi
CODE rips towers as fun, how would that make things diff? "Making stuctures important" or w/e
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1448 - 2015-06-08 20:51:17 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
xxxTRUSTxxx wrote:
i'd think most after 6 months know well they can be shot at no matter where they are.
i've met a few over the years that didn't get it. but most know better after a while.

Many that know, still oppose the idea.

They rage when they get shot at, they come and complain in the forum how pvp in highsec should be made harder (eg. -10s not allowed in highsec, high slot modules shouldn't work in highsec, non-consensual pvp should be removed from highsec because it's meant to be safe, etc) and they post ideas in the F&I forum designed to make themself safer while eliminating other people's play. They constantly call for nerfs to pvp and complain how pvp affects player retention without even attempting to understand whether that is true or not, just because they don't like it.

Truth be told lately i see a lot more whine and cry from Feyd, Kaarous and 'pro-pvp' company than from so called 'carebears'. Something happened....

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Ivant Sumboodi
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1449 - 2015-06-08 20:54:27 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
[quote=Ivant Sumboodi][quote=Lucas Kell] stuff
[quote=Black Pedro

You can't build ties to this game if all you do is play with yourself and the vast majority of player won't pay a monthly sub for a game they don't feel any attachment to.


Good point, I often forget such a thing.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1450 - 2015-06-08 20:54:36 UTC
March rabbit wrote:

Truth be told lately i see a lot more whine and cry from Feyd, Kaarous and 'pro-pvp' company than from so called 'carebears'. Something happened....


For my part, I never used to get on the forums at all until a few years ago.

Then I got tired of there being only one voice presented to CCP on the forums. If you'll notice, I'm not the one making threads. I just answer them.

"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.
Orion Nex
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#1451 - 2015-06-08 20:54:51 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Orion Nex wrote:

That's why I think ganking should be the danger in high sec. War decs would be to take over structures or something of high value.


I don't think any one thing should be "the" danger in highsec. (or just two things, either)

Only one thing is only one thing to watch out for. And I don't think it should be that simple, or that restricted.


Right, I don't necessarily think it should be one thing.

I think making war decs cost prohibitive for just trolling would go a long way. Perhaps a better UI for corps to hire help if they are war dec'd? I wouldn't have a freakin clue how to get help.

From the sound of it CCP has data that's telling them the type of people I'm talking about protecting don't stay with the game anyway. Eve isn't a casual game, I'm sure that the new player retention is going to be low on any metric for such an in-depth game that has players with a 10 year head start.

From my perspective the playground where people MIGHT get attached to the game is full of mechanics that makes people play solo at a stage when they should be grouped up. If the answer to the problem is, leave your group of players that are teaching you the game, it seems like the root problem needs to be fixed.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#1452 - 2015-06-08 20:56:41 UTC
Orion Nex wrote:
Black Pedro wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
The existence of ganking also creates subs.


Was just thinking this.

Yeah, a guy who dislikes PvP gets ganked...sure he might quit. But could that ganking also lead to 1 or more new subs? If so, then a larger view of things needs to be considered.

That is exactly what CCP said at Fanfest and it makes perfect sense. It's not hard to imagine the thousands of players who started the trial expecting space battles and spent it mining or missioning solo and nothing at all interesting happens to them. All this bubble-wrapping of highsec in recent years has isolated most of them from even the hint of excitement and so they come to the conclusion that Eve is boring and do not subscribe.

CCP Rise said that less that a fraction of a percent of people who quit cite ship loss as the reason. How many multiples of that number were just bored out of the game?


If there's a large corp of high sec carebears that are socially playing the game together and exploring different avenues in Eve or the same group of players all in NPC corps derping around without a clue which is more likely to lead to subscriptions?


I have no idea what you are going on about. CCP Rise was talking about new players staying with the game. New players that experience combat, whether consensual or non-consensual like a gank are more likely to subscribe than players who spend the trial alone shooting rocks or levelling thier Raven.

Getting these new players out of the isolation of NPC corps and engaged with sandbox is the best path CCP sees to increase player retention. Whether that is into a PvP corp that preys on miners and industrialists with ganks and wardecs or into a highsec industrial corp that dodges these players while "exploring different avenues of Eve" is beside the point. The point is that it is player conflict which drives interactions is good for getting players, especially new players, engaged with the game. And in modern highsec, that conflict is an increasingly rare commodity.

What is demonstrably bad for the game is pandering to calls for increased safety by players out of self-interest who don't want to spend time or effort on thier defense. These "carebears" are not just confined to highsec however. They are in all spaces and deserved to be cleansed with fire (in-game of course) wherever they are found.

The 8 Golden Rules of Eve

Why Do They Gank?
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1453 - 2015-06-08 20:58:55 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
At no point did I defend ISBoxer.
Ha ha, what? That's damn near all you did for a solid month.
You are mistaken. From the getgo the problem I had was with the way they were approaching the whole situation, not with them getting rid of ISBoxer. Here's a quote from me 5 days after the post started:
Lucas Kell wrote:
At the end of the day CCP are treating a symptom here. The problem is that mining is boring as sin, bombers are too powerful, and the control system is far too simple all round. Fixing that by nuking out a single playstyle isn't fixing it.

The same was on my blog. I'd much rather CCP approached how easy and static the content is that ISBoxers tend towards. There's still solo players running incursions and mining in droves, so it's fixed nothing.

Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
They were never at risk, barring the obvious lies and smokescreen from the bot apologists in that thread, yourself included.
You're wrong, Even CCP have admitted this. Unless of course you are claiming that CCP are completely infallible and never ever ever make mistakes.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Ivant Sumboodi
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1454 - 2015-06-08 20:59:27 UTC
best way to get out of isolation is getting your full API demanded. After all, it's the only way to run a legit corp.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#1455 - 2015-06-08 21:02:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Lucas Kell wrote:
Yeah, that's my point. People are always saying "how can we turn that 40% into more for the 10%". What I'm saying is "what did that 40% want to do that can be improved so they stay on their own terms". To me they came in wanting a diverse PvE experience, and they got the barely passable red crosses and rocks that is EVE PvE. Make EVE PvE more varied and group friendly and they will get what they came for and likely stay longer.

Say for example you run a soup shop, and you sell an amazing chicken soup. You also sell a tomato soup from a tin.
50% of your walk ins don;t fancy soup and leave.
40% come in for tomato soup, but don;t come back because it's terrible.
10% come for the chicken soup and love it, returning every day.

Why try to find ways to make the 40% love chicken soup when you could simply make your tomato soup better? You've already done the hard part of getting them in the store, Now you just need to help them enjoy what they came in for.

Does that not make sense?

Ah ok. My slight misunderstanding on what you were getting at and I think in part Rise dealt with that some.

The aspect of that 40% wasn't that they were doing PvE as such (that was just what CCP recognised that the NPE directed that group towards). It was more that they moved into a very isolated playstyle (Rise's exact description if I remember correctly). It was more about them being isolated away from social experiences than it was about what they were actually doing.

PvE is rubbish in this game and I totally agree that any improvement in it would be welcome development for many, but I don't know that CCP would still want people to be doing it in an isolated manner. They'd much rather promote social interaction.

So with the soup example, I think what CCP might be seeing is:

50% don't buy
40% buy and eat on their own
10% share their soup with someone else

That 10% isn't only about pvp. PvE fits in there too. The whole thing was more about socialising (rich experiences was what that part of the presentation was about) than about the actual content, though improved content for everyone would be great and I think the whole sleeper/drifter coming invasion, new wormholes accessible, new opportunities system, cruiser burner missions, shattered wormholes and development of the NPC AI show CCP are working on that.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1456 - 2015-06-08 21:05:32 UTC
Orion Nex wrote:

I think making war decs cost prohibitive for just trolling would go a long way.


CCP thought that too. Before they did precisely that, wardec groups were smaller and sporadic compared to these days.

Increasing costs just forced people to conglomerate into larger groups to preserve their playstyle. Now we have much larger groups.

It was much the same with ganking. People didn't used to min/max ganking down to minutiae, they did that in response to carebears crying for more "consequences" against their playstyle. Now they have to behave the way they do, if they want to preserve the way they play the game at all. And carebears still cry that ganking needs more punishments, and the only proof they offer is that ganking still happens at all, so it must need "just one more nerf", yet again. Their goal is not game balance, and it never was. Their endgame is the removal of PvP from highsec.

Restrictions are only going to raise the bar further, meaning that any wardec groups that survive the added restrictions are going to be increasingly impossible to take on for the average carebear group, who hasn't had to survive any adversity, because their playstyles don't have any. And so on until the only thing left is to ban it outright, or functionally remove it just like with awoxing.

Loosening the decade of unreasonable restrictions is the way forward.

"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.
Orion Nex
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#1457 - 2015-06-08 21:10:50 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Orion Nex wrote:
Black Pedro wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
The existence of ganking also creates subs.


Was just thinking this.

Yeah, a guy who dislikes PvP gets ganked...sure he might quit. But could that ganking also lead to 1 or more new subs? If so, then a larger view of things needs to be considered.

That is exactly what CCP said at Fanfest and it makes perfect sense. It's not hard to imagine the thousands of players who started the trial expecting space battles and spent it mining or missioning solo and nothing at all interesting happens to them. All this bubble-wrapping of highsec in recent years has isolated most of them from even the hint of excitement and so they come to the conclusion that Eve is boring and do not subscribe.

CCP Rise said that less that a fraction of a percent of people who quit cite ship loss as the reason. How many multiples of that number were just bored out of the game?


If there's a large corp of high sec carebears that are socially playing the game together and exploring different avenues in Eve or the same group of players all in NPC corps derping around without a clue which is more likely to lead to subscriptions?


I have no idea what you are going on about. CCP Rise was talking about new players staying with the game. New players that experience combat, whether consensual or non-consensual like a gank are more likely to subscribe than players who spend the trial alone shooting rocks or levelling thier Raven.

Getting these new players out of the isolation of NPC corps and engaged with sandbox is the best path CCP sees to increase player retention. Whether that is into a PvP corp that preys on miners and industrialists with ganks and wardecs or into a highsec industrial corp that dodges these players while "exploring different avenues of Eve" is beside the point. The point is that it is player conflict which drives interactions is good for getting players, especially new players, engaged with the game. And in modern highsec, that conflict is an increasingly rare commodity.

What is demonstrably bad for the game is pandering to calls for increased safety by players out of self-interest who don't want to spend time or effort on thier defense. These "carebears" are not just confined to highsec however. They are in all spaces and deserved to be cleansed with fire (in-game of course) wherever they are found.


I'm not calling for safety out of self-interest. At least not in the way I think you are talking about.

But I'd like for you to honest answer the question. If new players were joining corps in high sec and being introduced to the game wouldn't it be better than what you have now? If this happens currently they are guaranteed to get dec'd and they will disband 9/10.

It's one of those deals where you can want people to behave differently, but you have to do something to change it. I don't think there is anything you can do to make 100 miners band together to fight against Marmite in Hek. It sounds good, hey guys defend yourselves. But it's simply not happening.

People are saying the same things over and over back and forth. I'll join a corp right now if some experienced person wants to teach 100 guys how to beat Marmite with high sec mechanics. Would Marmite show up in numbers and we'd eventually have a 1000 ship battle in high sec? No, they wouldn't show up that's not the kind of fight they are looking for. Am I being hyperbolic, yes.

If those high sec groups were able to operate a bit without getting shut down with war decs they'd soon find as others have pointed out that the margins suck and they'd need to find something better to generate ISK.

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1458 - 2015-06-08 21:14:09 UTC
Orion Nex wrote:

If those high sec groups were able to operate a bit without getting shut down with war decs they'd soon find as others have pointed out that the margins suck and they'd need to find something better to generate ISK.



They can already, wars can be trivially dodged without consequence.

"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.
Orion Nex
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#1459 - 2015-06-08 21:16:16 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Orion Nex wrote:

If those high sec groups were able to operate a bit without getting shut down with war decs they'd soon find as others have pointed out that the margins suck and they'd need to find something better to generate ISK.



They can already, wars can be trivially dodged without consequence.


Exactly, players leave corps to avoid war decs. Play solo for a while and quit.

It's not a difficult concept.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1460 - 2015-06-08 21:24:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Lucas Kell
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Ah ok. My slight misunderstanding on what you were getting at and I think in part Rise dealt with that some.

The aspect of that 40% wasn't that they were doing PvE as such (that was just what CCP recognised that the NPE directed that group towards). It was more that they moved into a very isolated playstyle (Rise's exact description if I remember correctly). It was more about them being isolated away from social experiences than it was about what they were actually doing.

PvE is rubbish in this game and I totally agree that any improvement in it would be welcome development for many, but I don't know that CCP would still want people to be doing it in an isolated manner. They'd much rather promote social interaction.

So with the soup example, I think what CCP might be seeing is:

50% don't buy
40% buy and eat on their own
10% share their soup with someone else

That 10% isn't only about pvp. PvE fits in there too. The whole thing was more about socialising than about the actual content, though improved content for everyone would be great and I think the whole sleeper/drifter coming invasion, new wormholes accessible, new opportunities system, cruiser burner missions, shattered wormholes and development of the NPC AI show CCP are working on that.
He said that they go into an isolated playstyle, yes, but specifically stating missionioning and mining, mostly missioning and he use words along the lines of "the classic thempark". The problem is that most PvE isn't a group activity. People are isolated because that's the way the PvE content is designed. Incursions are an exception but they are very elitist and generally dominated by multiboxers due to their ease of farming. IMHO, they need more earlier group PvE content to encourage people to play together (and prefereably ways for PvE corps to actually exist), it shouldn't constantly be about finding new ways to encourage them to get blown up since they just aren't interested in that. This new content all seems geared towards veteran players who already interact.

Edit: I think we're somewhere along the same lines of thinking here, this thread simply isn't. This thread is basically "grr NPC corps", as if nuking those would suddenly force people to socialise rather than just quit.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.