These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

The Shrinking Sandbox - Eve by numbers

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#1141 - 2015-06-11 11:52:46 UTC
0bama Barack Hussein wrote:
GankYou wrote:

Perhaps you didn't start the game with 5k PCU, well I did and it was FUN back then as it now. Blink I acknowledged that the current activity is back to 2008 levels - no need to be overly emo about it.



THIS.

EvE has survived also before with smaller numbers, now people panic, go emotional, and even so far they see other games like ED or SC as some kind of a "threath" to EvE (eventhough both are totally different kind of games and not even subscription based, so one can afford to buy them and still keep playing EvE)...

Sure CCP needs to stop downwards trend, but it is only up to CCP themselves, to be more precise, how well they can lure players to stay (even if they would play also other games, only enemy to CCP can come from within as a bad judgements).

These kind of threads are what CCP needs to get ideas how to improve this game, though sure can only hope they read these (naturally they have prime directive of not effecting natural evolution of threads, so how would we know if they listen?)...


I'm sure CCP can survive with 5k players, of course. after massive lay offs and as a small garage company with 10 employes. good luck with that. On the other hand they should make the universe smaller, if they want any player interaction at all, remove WH space etc. Eve Universe is way too big for 5k players.
GankYou
9B30FF Labs
#1142 - 2015-06-11 12:15:07 UTC  |  Edited by: GankYou
0bama Barack Hussein wrote:
GankYou wrote:

Perhaps you didn't start the game with 5k PCU, well I did and it was FUN back then as it now. Blink I acknowledged that the current activity is back to 2008 levels - no need to be overly emo about it.



THIS.

EvE has survived also before with smaller numbers, now people panic, go emotional, and even so far they see other games like ED or SC as some kind of a "threath" to EvE (eventhough both are totally different kind of games and not even subscription based, so one can afford to buy them and still keep playing EvE)...

Sure CCP needs to stop downwards trend, but it is only up to CCP themselves, to be more precise, how well they can lure players to stay (even if they would play also other games, only enemy to CCP can come from within as a bad judgements).

These kind of threads are what CCP needs to get ideas how to improve this game, though sure can only hope they read these (naturally they have prime directive of not effecting natural evolution of threads, so how would we know if they listen?)...


To be fair, current activity levels have already exceeded the lows of Summer 2012, which means a major corrective wave is in effect, with the following possible scenarios within the next five years:

1) Smaller rebounds here and there, developing into a complex correction with no distinct drive or momentum - can even happen with significant effort invested on CCP's part, though perhaps in an area which the people really do not want, desire or expect. Stagnation in other words with outlook towards point three;

Further insight on point one: Such situations develop when growth rate is taken for granted, though which is unsupported by the circumstances inherently built into the system/intrument, with fundamental signals neglected in the medium-term. Once this gets momentum, it will break all stops, all lows and surprise one, despite one's best efforts to counter or rationalise it.

Coherence & integrity can be lost overnight, but the rate at which it builds up is an order of magnitude slower than that.

2) A new Renaissance period, following great success of the coming new gameplay expansions, with possibly even more /hint WiS. Paradigm change with core values wrapped around what made EVE be-come in the first place - PCUs to generally exceed previous records by 50-160%;

3) Eve Offline

Smile

...And they all crave one thing - ISK. ¤

[WTS] ME10 / TE20 BPOs from Battleships/Cruisers to Fighters, Carriers, Triage/Siege, XL modules & Cap Components
Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#1143 - 2015-06-11 13:27:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Market McSelling Alt
GankYou wrote:
0bama Barack ******* wrote:
GankYou wrote:

Perhaps you didn't start the game with 5k PCU, well I did and it was FUN back then as it now. Blink I acknowledged that the current activity is back to 2008 levels - no need to be overly emo about it.



THIS.

EvE has survived also before with smaller numbers, now people panic, go emotional, and even so far they see other games like ED or SC as some kind of a "threath" to EvE (eventhough both are totally different kind of games and not even subscription based, so one can afford to buy them and still keep playing EvE)...

Sure CCP needs to stop downwards trend, but it is only up to CCP themselves, to be more precise, how well they can lure players to stay (even if they would play also other games, only enemy to CCP can come from within as a bad judgements).

These kind of threads are what CCP needs to get ideas how to improve this game, though sure can only hope they read these (naturally they have prime directive of not effecting natural evolution of threads, so how would we know if they listen?)...


To be fair, current activity levels have already exceeded the lows of Summer 2012, which means a major corrective wave is in effect, with the following possible scenarios within the next five years:



Whoa, no need to lie bro.

2012 saw an average online count of 44k for the year, the summer was 38k.

2015 to date has been 29k average with a dropping trend, actual very very clear and consistent drop in average users. You can support this game without blatant and obvious misinformation.

The only time in Eve's history there was an average at 29k for a sustained period of time was Summer of 2006. And it was on the exact opposite curve up to the slow and stead 2007 build. So 9 years ago we saw these averages, with 2 less regions and no W-Space.

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
GankYou
9B30FF Labs
#1144 - 2015-06-11 13:30:07 UTC
Read it again.

Exceeded the lows - went below that particular level. Smile

http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility

...And they all crave one thing - ISK. ¤

[WTS] ME10 / TE20 BPOs from Battleships/Cruisers to Fighters, Carriers, Triage/Siege, XL modules & Cap Components
Market McSelling Alt
Doomheim
#1145 - 2015-06-11 13:31:30 UTC
GankYou wrote:
Read it again.

Exceeded the lows - went below that particular level. Smile

http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility



Exceeded the lows sounds like you imply we are ABOVE the lows... 2012 wasn't a low year in retrospect now was it Roll

CCP Quant: Of all those who logon in Eve, 1.5% do Incursions, 13.8% PVP and 19.2% run Missions while 22.4% mine.

40.7% Join a fleet. The idea that Eve is a PVP game is false, the social fabric is in Missions and Mining.
GankYou
9B30FF Labs
#1146 - 2015-06-11 13:37:03 UTC
Exceeded the highs - went below them by that logic? Smile

Just admit you misread, or misunderstood, and yes the year 2012-YC114 had the lowest activity on record since 2008, and has now been exceeded by our current predicament. Blink

...And they all crave one thing - ISK. ¤

[WTS] ME10 / TE20 BPOs from Battleships/Cruisers to Fighters, Carriers, Triage/Siege, XL modules & Cap Components
Moth Eisig
Gallente Federation
#1147 - 2015-06-11 14:09:26 UTC
GankYou wrote:
Exceeded the highs - went below them by that logic? Smile

Just admit you misread, or misunderstood,


Just admit you misused or misunderstood the definition of exceed.
GankYou
9B30FF Labs
#1148 - 2015-06-11 14:48:33 UTC  |  Edited by: GankYou
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1149 - 2015-06-11 15:39:18 UTC
GankYou wrote:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/exceed
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/exceed
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/exceed
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/exceed

Keep running in circles. Smile

Professionals at work, can't read a chart, then when they do - they do it upside down.


That's not how anybody else uses "exceed." Or its synonyms such as surpass, eclipse, top, outdo, etc. For clarity of communication, you could have said:

"To be fair, current activity levels have already (failed to meet | been below) the lows of Summer 2012..."

If you want people to continue to think you said the opposite of what you intended, you can leave your post the way it is. If you'd like them to understand your intent, editing your post would accomplish that.

Sorry for the OT, mods, just trying to promote clearer communication.
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1150 - 2015-06-11 18:39:42 UTC
Moth Eisig wrote:
GankYou wrote:
Exceeded the highs - went below them by that logic? Smile

Just admit you misread, or misunderstood,


Just admit you misused or misunderstood the definition of exceed.

being not native I got it right. So i think he used right words

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#1151 - 2015-06-11 20:02:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
Moth Eisig wrote:
GankYou wrote:
Exceeded the highs - went below them by that logic? Smile

Just admit you misread, or misunderstood,


Just admit you misused or misunderstood the definition of exceed.


I had no issues understanding him: A negative can exceed another negative by being a larger negative. FAI, which is larger: -12,000 players compared to 2014, or -18,000 players compared to 2011?

(63,000 players online, that was 2011's top PCU, surpassed only by the 10th anniversary record challenge. This year's top PCU it's been 45,000 so far, and just for the funs, let me note that historically February is EVE's best month in terms of PCU).

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#1152 - 2015-06-11 22:51:40 UTC
GankYou wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:

GankYou said; All-time 37k average is about right - we had 9k people back in 2004.

The " 37K average" like 9k in 2004 is not relevant. What is relevant is how many are online playing the game 24/7/365 "now" not a few years ago.
That number currently, is far below the 37K average and the fact the "average" comes from peak numbers of 3 or 4 years ago is a very real indication - There is something fundamentally wrong.


Weighted-averages are always relevant.

Perhaps you didn't start the game with 5k PCU, well I did and it was FUN back then as it now. Blink I acknowledged that the current activity is back to 2008 levels - no need to be overly emo about it.

The issue is being addressed with Sov 5.0, which you think is "irrelevant" again. Big smile

Is it being addressed?
I don't believe it is and my reasons for this are spread throughout not only this thread but other threads as well.
If sov isn't addressed in the right way now, it changes nothing. Addressing sov = Working toward balance. Fozziesov does not do that, it simply favors entrenched groups and puts large barriers up for new entrants.

As for weighted averages, that is all they are - they show a nice clear picture of what used to be. They only become relevant when broken down and used as an incremental history to show the current state.

I've been here since 2007 - still own the character, it is just not subbed and really only started posting on the forums when devs decided unbalanced, biased, unfinished and some just plain wrong changes belonged in the game.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Milla Goodpussy
Garoun Investment Bank
#1153 - 2015-06-11 22:58:10 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
GankYou wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:

GankYou said; All-time 37k average is about right - we had 9k people back in 2004.

The " 37K average" like 9k in 2004 is not relevant. What is relevant is how many are online playing the game 24/7/365 "now" not a few years ago.
That number currently, is far below the 37K average and the fact the "average" comes from peak numbers of 3 or 4 years ago is a very real indication - There is something fundamentally wrong.


Weighted-averages are always relevant.

Perhaps you didn't start the game with 5k PCU, well I did and it was FUN back then as it now. Blink I acknowledged that the current activity is back to 2008 levels - no need to be overly emo about it.

The issue is being addressed with Sov 5.0, which you think is "irrelevant" again. Big smile

Is it being addressed?
I don't believe it is and my reasons for this are spread throughout not only this thread but other threads as well.
If sov isn't addressed in the right way now, it changes nothing. Addressing sov = Working toward balance. Fozziesov does not do that, it simply favors entrenched groups and puts large barriers up for new entrants.

As for weighted averages, that is all they are - they show a nice clear picture of what used to be. They only become relevant when broken down and used as an incremental history to show the current state.

I've been here since 2007 - still own the character, it is just not subbed and really only started posting on the forums when devs decided unbalanced, biased, unfinished and some just plain wrong changes belonged in the game.




Shocked they gone hate you now cause you stuck it to them hard bro..

eve online worshippers are so in denial about the current state of affairs that they'll run to completely different companie's game forum just to argue about how its not like eve online. but once told to GTFOH and TYABTEO then.. they come back with their silly little feelings hurt.

matter of fact this is the only community that I know of that would cheer on claiming eve is a huge success while having only 15k players online.
Aza Ebanu
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1154 - 2015-06-12 07:18:02 UTC
I think EVE's endgame can be had too easily/early in a player's experience. Just join a null SOV corp and do random stuff in null. The game design doesn't really let you do sand box stuff.
0bama Barack Hussein
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1155 - 2015-06-12 10:41:27 UTC
Aza Ebanu wrote:
I think EVE's endgame can be had too easily/early in a player's experience. Just join a null SOV corp and do random stuff in null. The game design doesn't really let you do sand box stuff.


I guess point is one can always reach higher, even get some responsible position, in theory.

Also, we have alts for FW, wormholes, incursions etc. if we get bored to null Pirate
GankYou
9B30FF Labs
#1156 - 2015-06-12 11:33:37 UTC  |  Edited by: GankYou
Eli Stan wrote:
GankYou wrote:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/exceed
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/exceed
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/exceed
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/exceed

Keep running in circles. Smile

Professionals at work, can't read a chart, then when they do - they do it upside down.


That's not how anybody else uses "exceed."


Perhaps not in the normal sense, but it is readily employed in the financial world.

Quote:
Or its synonyms such as surpass, eclipse, top, outdo, etc.


Read the definitions again.

To surpass, outdo, or eclipse the previous lows would have the same meaning.

Aza Ebanu wrote:
I think EVE's endgame can be had too easily/early in a player's experience. Just join a null SOV corp and do random stuff in null. The game design doesn't really let you do sand box stuff.


In some ways, EVE does not have an end game scenario. I personally get zero ISK cents from CONCORD. Blink

The notion that there's no real sandbox is hilarious, really.

Tech 1 alone: Ores -> Reprocess or Compress Ores -> Minerals -> Components if Capitals -> Ships & Modules
Tech 2: Moon minerals -> Simple Reaction -> Complex Reaction -> Components -> Ships & Modules, plus all that is contained in Tech 1.
Tech 3 - http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/File:T3_Flowchart.png

Not to mention all the work involved with Blueprints & Research.

There is division of labour and a functioning economy in this game LIKE YOU WOULDN'T BELIEVE!

EVE is Real.

...And they all crave one thing - ISK. ¤

[WTS] ME10 / TE20 BPOs from Battleships/Cruisers to Fighters, Carriers, Triage/Siege, XL modules & Cap Components
Milla Goodpussy
Garoun Investment Bank
#1157 - 2015-06-12 12:32:08 UTC
GankYou wrote:
Eli Stan wrote:
GankYou wrote:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/exceed
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/exceed
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/exceed
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/exceed

Keep running in circles. Smile

Professionals at work, can't read a chart, then when they do - they do it upside down.


That's not how anybody else uses "exceed."


Perhaps not in the normal sense, but it is readily employed in the financial world.

Quote:
Or its synonyms such as surpass, eclipse, top, outdo, etc.


Read the definitions again.

To surpass, outdo, or eclipse the previous lows would have the same meaning.

Aza Ebanu wrote:
I think EVE's endgame can be had too easily/early in a player's experience. Just join a null SOV corp and do random stuff in null. The game design doesn't really let you do sand box stuff.


In some ways, EVE does not have an end game scenario. I personally get zero ISK cents from CONCORD. Blink

The notion that there's no real sandbox is hilarious, really.

Tech 1 alone: Ores -> Reprocess or Compress Ores -> Minerals -> Components if Capitals -> Ships & Modules
Tech 2: Moon minerals -> Simple Reaction -> Complex Reaction -> Components -> Ships & Modules, plus all that is contained in Tech 1.
Tech 3 - http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/File:T3_Flowchart.png

Not to mention all the work involved with Blueprints & Research.

There is division of labour and a functioning economy in this game LIKE YOU WOULDN'T BELIEVE!

EVE is Real.



and lets not forget while yes eve has this, it also has the most rude, vile, vindictive, hyper-aggressive community in all of mmo gaming. its so bad here that eve online struggles to break 30k online players on a Good Day. its so obvious that the games numbers are tanking that when you bring it up in-game to season vets that they darn near have a stroke or ignore you.
your game is sucking right now bro
all ccp does is figure out what else to nerf while avoiding the real things that need to be nerf'd!! all ccp does is cater to the large coalitions then say its a sandbox game.. which it is NOT... eve hasn't been a sandbox game for a very long time this has been written time and time again and in every way.. eve online is not a sandbox any more..

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1158 - 2015-06-12 12:36:00 UTC
Milla Goodpussy wrote:

and lets not forget while yes eve has this, it also has the most rude, vile, vindictive, hyper-aggressive community in all of mmo gaming.


That's not even close to true, but rant all you like.

Quote:

its so bad here that eve online struggles to break 30k online players on a Good Day.


Ah, so apparently the reason "EVE is dying" is because people are allowed to be mean. Roll

"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.
GankYou
9B30FF Labs
#1159 - 2015-06-12 12:39:14 UTC
Milla Goodpussy wrote:

and lets not forget while yes eve has this, it also has the most rude, vile, vindictive, hyper-aggressive community in all of mmo gaming. its so bad here that eve online struggles to break 30k online players on a Good Day. its so obvious that the games numbers are tanking that when you bring it up in-game to season vets that they darn near have a stroke or ignore you.
your game is sucking right now bro


Aren't we playing the same game right now? This attribution tastes so emo. Blink

Quote:
all ccp does is figure out what else to nerf while avoiding the real things that need to be nerf'd!! all ccp does is cater to the large coalitions then say its a sandbox game.. which it is NOT... eve hasn't been a sandbox game for a very long time this has been written time and time again and in every way.. eve online is not a sandbox any more..


Could you expand how it is not a sandbox, and how it caters to large coalitions in light of Sov 5.0?

The latter part of the question had been the case - that is true, but it appears to be changing, as they would like to see more than 30k people online. Blink

...And they all crave one thing - ISK. ¤

[WTS] ME10 / TE20 BPOs from Battleships/Cruisers to Fighters, Carriers, Triage/Siege, XL modules & Cap Components
Nicolai Serkanner
Incredible.
Brave Collective
#1160 - 2015-06-12 13:23:03 UTC
Aza Ebanu wrote:
I think EVE's endgame can be had too easily/early in a player's experience. Just join a null SOV corp and do random stuff in null. The game design doesn't really let you do sand box stuff.


What part of sandbox don't you understand?