These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Decline in numbers... starting to turn into RAPID!!!

First post
Author
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#41 - 2015-08-25 13:32:36 UTC
Hey, is this the thread where we all wave our favorite theories to save EVE from Impending Doom?

Then, here's mine!

Improve vastly the quality of highsec solo gameplay. Since that's what 80% of noobs end doing, and even as the churn rate is crazy it also is what 50% of players do exclusively, it should be the single most important thing for CCP.

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you

Jenshae Chiroptera
#42 - 2015-08-25 13:37:43 UTC
Daniela Doran wrote:
... Fozzie Sov is still in the early stages and CCP seems committed to it. They will probably continue to make tune up changes from here on out ...
Tune ups won't help. The very core structure system is a dumbed down version of the previous one, with no sense of control over the tedium, you can't fit a ship to wave a wand faster for attack or repair. It makes fleets and gangs more shallow.

Basically, Fozzie SOV is shallow and very annoying.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#43 - 2015-08-25 13:47:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Daniela Doran wrote:
... Fozzie Sov is still in the early stages and CCP seems committed to it. They will probably continue to make tune up changes from here on out ...
Tune ups won't help. The very core structure system is a dumbed down version of the previous one, with no sense of control over the tedium, you can't fit a ship to wave a wand faster for attack or repair. It makes fleets and gangs more shallow.

Basically, Fozzie SOV is shallow and very annoying.


Agreed. Pressing a button to win unless someone else presses a button or kills you is not exactly crazy fun as a mechanic. It would be bad if there was nothing on stake, but with the coming structures, billions and even trillions of assets could be in stakes over who presses the last button uncontested... What?

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you

Illyasviel Von Aintsuberun
Doomheim
#44 - 2015-08-25 13:50:31 UTC
Remove high-sec, surely the number of people will grow then, r-right? Oops
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#45 - 2015-08-25 13:51:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
Hey, is this the thread where we all wave our favorite theories to save EVE from Impending Doom?

Then, here's mine!

Improve vastly the quality of highsec solo gameplay. Since that's what 80% of noobs end doing, and even as the churn rate is crazy it also is what 50% of players do exclusively, it should be the single most important thing for CCP.



Years of trying to cater to these kinds of people have resulted in the current situation. Here we see the power of self-interest, because what the above post is saying is 'hey, there is water coming into the ship, I like water, so lets turn on a fountain so that water gets into the ship faster!".

CCP has been on a crusade the past few years destroying what made EVE great in an attempt to 'broaden it's appeal'. When i started there just wasn't much PVE (there were missions, some static plexes around, COSMOS, lvl 5 missions were new, Marauders were new, Anomalies were random everywhere because of no upgrade system etc). CCP has literally STUFFED the game with PVE since then, Incursions, new missions, different focus for missions like epic arcs and pirate epic arcs, Wormhole PVE with new AI and mechanics, system upgrades in null sec, fleshed out npc factions like SOE and Mordus, "Clone" ships that drop tags, a mini game for exploration, new types of exploration like ghost sites, burner missions, and now Drifters.

And CCP has added way more safety to the game. A clean install of EVE Online will have a veteran declining so many pop ups and 'opportunities' it's crazy. Missions 'Guide' you, anomalies tell you how to get the escalation, mining ships have 'anchor' rigs and got ehp buffed a while back, CCP tweaked CONCORD several times, and even made faction police unbeatable (manipulating faction police used to be very fun in the early FW days).

The highlighted word above is the nail in the coffin. It seems like every time someone seems to have some fun or do something creative, CCP nerfs it. They advertised a game as "Be the Villain" then spent years nerfing villains...which did little but nerf people like me (anti-Villains). They advertised HUGE FLEET BATTLES then gave us Aegis. They advertised FREEDOM and have spent years developing constraints and nerfing freedom (because freedom is messy).



If you think EVE is dying you'd go back and look at when it wasn't dying, and advocate CCP do THAT again(concentrate on getting people to group together, for some to be villains, and for no one to ever feel 'safe'), not continue down the path that has led to the current situation. The path of trying to please those who can't ever be pleased, the Ishtanchuk Fazmarais of the world.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#46 - 2015-08-25 13:56:36 UTC
Jill Xelitras
Xeltec services
#47 - 2015-08-25 14:05:38 UTC
Tippia wrote:


Lies !


Don't anger the forum gods.

ISD Buldath:

> I Saw, I came, I Frowned, I locked, I posted, and I left.

Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#48 - 2015-08-25 14:06:02 UTC
Here is an idea. Lets make eve... Fun? Pvp combat once out of small gang is prettyvlacking in diversity. PvE is on rails. Been saying it lots in discussion about remove high, etc. The common topics. Is fine to cater to existing playerbases, but all people eventually go inactive. That is why a good business model starts at the new customer experience.

Doesnt mean change way eve works, but most new players get a more dynamic experience from Farming simulator in early gameplay. Partly players fault because we believe killboard efficiencies are more important than winning the fight. Get the newbs to be your grunts in pvp.

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.

Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#49 - 2015-08-25 14:08:43 UTC
Abrazzar wrote:
Increasing production times by a factor of three to five would be a start, so that a single player can no longer saturate a market with every module by his lonely self.

I came for the industry aspect of the game. Because it was deep, involving, an endeavour. And now I am going, because it was rendered a footnote.


This will only lead to more alts. A single player will still do all the work but over 9 alts instead of 3.
Jill Xelitras
Xeltec services
#50 - 2015-08-25 14:14:16 UTC
Markus Reese wrote:
Partly players fault because we believe killboard efficiencies are more important than winning the fight. Get the newbs to be your grunts in pvp.


"Go out young ones and perform suicide attacks against our enemies. You shall be rewarded with 7 virgin ships in the afterlife."

I can totally subscribe to that.

Don't anger the forum gods.

ISD Buldath:

> I Saw, I came, I Frowned, I locked, I posted, and I left.

Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#51 - 2015-08-25 14:16:05 UTC
fenrir mactire wrote:
ever since the big alliances decided to farm BRAVE to death the numbers have been dropping like a rock


But, but,... CONTENT!!!!!!
Bellatrix Invicta
Doomheim
#52 - 2015-08-25 14:36:44 UTC
Oh man. Wasn't this predicted? Nostradamus' 84th quatrain or something?

"The numbers do fall when tallied
The mighty core once so stable
When rivers run blue"

Something like that. No? Oh, this is just EvE is dying thread #42389?

Lame.

If you think you've won, think again.

The CODE always wins.

Presidente Gallente
Dark-Rising
Wrecking Machine.
#53 - 2015-08-25 14:59:47 UTC
If you just rate the game by players online we will be back to the good old times soon(tm). But EVE ppl are never satisfied. There's always something to complain on the whiners unite forums.

Salvos Rhoska
#54 - 2015-08-25 15:10:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Regardless of what has led to lower activity rates, what makes this all so complicated is the dynamic interconnection of the entire EVE community in all their individual pursuits.

Any change, anywhere, leads to a cascade effect throughout the rest of the game, often with unpredictable results.

FW farming (lack of pvp incentive), HS incursion payouts, sov mechanics, inflation due to various isk fountains, industry efficiency, HS ruleset, and dozens of others on the list of ingame grievances and room for improvement is endless.

I hope CCP is ontop of this and correctly analyzing the data they have to the right conclusions.

But the server figures, and the price of PLEX, are two real sets of figures we can work with, and which speak to the gross aggregate of how all the above is affecting player retention.

PLEX price in particular concerns me, in conjunction with lower activity.
The 1bil mark is a big psychological threshold.
PLEX price ingame is a watermark between subbing and PLEXing accounts/players (on however many accounts or skill programs).
I see 3 explanations:
1) Players who buy PLEX from CCP, have left the game, or no longer do so (perhaps instead subbing) leading to loss of PLEX supply. (Matches with lower activity)
2) Players who PLEX their accounts, have increased, leading to greater PLEX demand. (Doesnt match reduced activity) Or multitraining has taken a huge upswing (which would match reduced activity)
3) Players have finally managed to find a window in the market to manipulate PLEX by buying up available PLEX over the last 3-6months. This is unthinkable, but not impossible. Owing to the nature of EVE, Ive often wondered when someone would finally pull this off and effectively AWOX CCP feom within their own game. Would also be difficult to detect as cross referencing PLEX exchange over that period against server figures is inconclusive (especially if it was done over numerous front accounts)

In anycase, it is reasonable to expect, that the higher PLEX rises in isk, the less account activity we will have in EVE.

This is true even on the part of people who pay sub, as they no longer PLEX their other (unsubbed) accounts or train toons on the same account, as it is on the part of completely PLEXing players who now retire accounts, or stop multitraining. Multiboxers come up against the hard efficiency figures, and though demand for their supplies will rise as other multiboxers fold accounts, its not likely to match or exceed it. Against this, there is the assumption that more players will buy PLEX from CCP so as to sell them for isk for ingame activities, but I dont think this population is numerous enough to offset the amount of activity drop due to other players being simply unable to afford PLEXing accounts with ingame activities, are unwilling or unable to sub, and drop out.

The price will plateau when these even out, but the player activity drop may persist for quite sometime, if not indefinately, until CCP gets a truly shining review for future updates and beckons players back. Its easier to retain, than to entice a return. Increasing isk income ingame wont help, as that will just increase inflation, and hence PLEX price in a market that already has more demand than supply. The foreseeable new Drifter/Sleeper/Jovian PvE and whatnot will most likely not lead to marked asset destruction (as a PvP incentive would), and hence people buying PLEX from CCP to support that activity. Lets hope they do include PvP.

Going from around 750-800mil last year at this time last year, to 1bil this year, is 20-25% increase.
Something has definately happened here, and the further PLEX prices rise, the less active accounts there will be.

This is not "EVE is dead", but it is certainly contributing to less activity.

Inversly, I hope it atleast leads to higher concrete sub/PLEX revenue to CCP and thereafter more profitability, and better investment in game development.
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#55 - 2015-08-25 15:17:03 UTC
Tippia wrote:

The trouble with any graphs based upon the publicly available data we have is that we're just studying actively logged in account numbers, not unique players nor even active accounts.

ISbotting nerf
Extended skill queues
Multicharacter training
1b plex prices meaning people shed some of their alts or hibernate them

4 reasons why the PCUs will be down without necessarily losing a single player.

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager

Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#56 - 2015-08-25 15:19:57 UTC
Eli Apol wrote:
Tippia wrote:

The trouble with any graphs based upon the publicly available data we have is that we're just studying actively logged in account numbers, not unique players nor even active accounts.

ISbotting nerf
Extended skill queues
Multicharacter training
1b plex prices meaning people shed some of their alts or hibernate them

4 reasons why the PCUs will be down without necessarily losing a single player.


You can only meet a logged account in EVE, no matter if he's an alt or not. Less logged character is still less people in the game at that moment.

AtramLolipop
Space Wolves ind.
Solyaris Chtonium
#57 - 2015-08-25 15:22:30 UTC  |  Edited by: AtramLolipop
It's pretty straight forward why active numbers have dropped.

The reasons (in no particular order)

  • Jump changes - in my opinion this should have been about forcing people to choose "to go or not to go" keeping huge forces in a single area. What it really did is punish people for seeking out enjoyment.
  • Muliboxing - This also hurt people, from a PVP'er point of view, PVP itself has become dull, predictable and regimented. Preparing a fleet has itself become just as grinding as mining. Without logi no-one goes anywhere, so the little 3 man fleets usually piloted by the same person fixed many peoples need for chest beating PVP.
  • Sov changes - Blocks for a long LONG time in game have had a safe heaven to play the game. With Blocks owning and not occupying vast amounts of space, and then hurting the small entities when they take a piece of the pie, for me, this needed to happen a long LONG time ago. Whether the current changes are sufficient I am not sure but people want to be able to have a dynamic game play and unless someone feels that their play ground is being threatened usually the defenders will sit tidy until the roaming army have got bored and moved on. The point here is that rather than players playing the game and perhaps engaging, like we used to when the game was first developed, unless their is a fear of losing something valuable no one bothers.
  • Plex prices - Yeah hate this, plex is suppose to incentive's people to grind, react, or what not but this has become a massive bubble that many are no longer able to achieve without spending a long time grinding.
  • Others worth noting - Recon changes, NPC changes, Overview changes, ship balancing - (detest this)


What it isn't is HS incursion payouts. Many use HS incursions to grind quickly to fund other types of game play. The actual amount of ISK generated in HS via a HS incursion is no where near the amount of isk generated via missioning and ratting in null sec. Get this one right now!

There we go my predictions on why Eve numbers have dropped. This of course could be all part of a bigger plan for Eve to get back to it's roots of being a sandbox and inevitably along the way there will be causalities that see their empire crumbling beneath them. Personally if this means that blocks die, caps stay docked unless required, entitles can have a piece of the pie then I am ready to come along on the journey. I just can't see the end at the moment.
Salvos Rhoska
#58 - 2015-08-25 15:54:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
AtramLolipop wrote:

  • Muliboxing - This also hurt people, from a PVP'er point of view, PVP itself has become dull, predictable and regimented. Preparing a fleet has itself become just as grinding as mining. Without logi no-one goes anywhere, so the little 3 man fleets usually piloted by the same person fixed many peoples need for chest beating PVP.

  • This struck me as particularly interesting.

    Imo, from personal experience and preference, EVE is in many ways best played with atleast 2 accounts simultaneously.
    This has less to do with the pragmatic matching of two pilots and their ships and all the ways they can support united action together for greater results (which are almost unlimited throughout many activities in EVE) but also to do with EVE being inherently quite a bit of a grind/waiting game, as well as such a huge universe. Also, that you can completely trust your alt, whereas you can never fully trust another capsuleer.

    Its not for everyone, but really 2 accounts offer such a huge opportunity for what you can do in EVE with your own recognisance.
    It doubles your potential and complicates it immesurably with opportunities for synergy. The jump from 2 to 3 accounts however, starts to become cumbersome and is inherently less advantage than 1 to 2. 1-2 is x2. 2-3 is only 1.5x.

    Having said that, things got out of hand with multibox fleets exploiting various game systems.
    HS multibox mining (ice especially) in particular, became a laughing matter where the equation above actually started paying out far higher dividends the more accounts you ran, as mining is inherently so passive (compared to other activities) and HS safety. Attention or action was no threshold or limitation. Point and click, check back every so few minutes.

    But I think there needs to be a threshold in EVE, between what you can do alone with all your accounts, and the incentive to join together with others for greater success/profit/opportunity.

    Perhaps EVE population is now rationalizing back into that.
    Higher PLEX cost- less multi-accounts= more incentive to interplay with others.
    In that sense, it makes sense that activity figures are at 2007 figures, and perhaps is a good thing for community and commitment.
    Also establishes a precedent for a period when active account figures were indeed as low as now, but led to growth (albeit, without a 1bil PLEX price over their head, but inflation and various isk fountains didnt exist back then either as they do today).

    Rising PLEX prices can also be considered a positive element, leading to, yes, less active population, but also perhaps more interaction between them. More "real" players with a real commitment to their accounts.
    Tiberius Heth
    Doomheim
    #59 - 2015-08-25 16:02:29 UTC
    Years and years of focussing on PVE, bearing and making everything easier/safer lead to this and it's highly ironic a bear would then state "we need more pve, that would surely help".
    Jenn aSide
    Soul Machines
    The Initiative.
    #60 - 2015-08-25 16:03:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
    AtramLolipop wrote:

    What it isn't is HS incursion payouts. Many use HS incursions to grind quickly to fund other types of game play. The actual amount of ISK generated in HS via a HS incursion is no where near the amount of isk generated via missioning and ratting in null sec. Get this one right now!


    The above just isn't true. In fine and Glorious fashion, one of the people defending incursions once posted a link to a chart CCP published showing isk faucets.

    The one for 'bounties' (missions, anoms, belt rats, things like that) was close to 30 trillion isk on that graph Incursion rewards (with the overwhelming bulk coming from high sec) was like 10 trillion.

    "NOW WAIT, Doesn't that prove what I just said?!!" you are probably asking yourself. Well, you'd think so...

    ...Till you realize that that 30 trillion isk is generated by Tens of Thousands of characters killing thousands upon thousands of NPCs all over Known Space, where as that 10 trillion isk bundle made mostly from high sec incursions is falling into the hands of a few hundred players. It means incursion runners per capita isk generation is a good couple light years past every other form of liquid isk generation.

    And the above does NOT take into account CONCORD LP...


    Last time I looked there were something like 80,000 characters in alliances that hold null sov, and nullsec accounts for 75% of all isk bountes, so something like 22.5 trillion isk per month.

    80,000 characters (not all ratting, but that's the population) in the various null regions only generate slightly more than twice (22.5 T isk) as much as a few hundred incursions runners (10 T isk) . And most of that incursion isk comes from high sec (space protected by CONCORD).

    You can't tell me that's not broken as all hell. I know of what I speak, I was a refugee in high sec for a long time running incursions because null just wasn't worth it. Ran with TVP, ISN, WTM and others.