These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Create Battle Arenas

Author
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#41 - 2015-09-16 11:56:01 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:

1. Help new players prepare for real pvp
2. Hep explain pvp modules to new player
3. Make in easier for even organizers to organize tournaments
4. Create a alliance tournament style arena for people who want a true test of skill
5. Create a means of identifying the most skilled pilots in the game
6. Creates an activity for casual (or time restricted) players
7. Adds to the sandbox
8. Ensures fairness for both parties
9. Doesn't rely on an organizer
10. Anyone can take part

1. No it doesn't, it would cause new players to wonder why there is a neutral RR during a duel outside your arena.
2. Some, but not all and not in the same way as open PVP
3. No easier than it already is currently.
4. In an arena, it proves nothing about skill in the open game world.
5. Again, no it doesn't, it would only prove to find Spartacus.
6. Meh
7. It removes players from the sandbox and waiting docked up for their turn in the arena.
8. Eve is not fair.
9. But CCP would be the organizer, so yes it still would.
10. If they have the money, and the time, and are part of the right group of players, have not pissed any of the regulars off in the past, are marked blue to the rest of the "gladiator" community....

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#42 - 2015-09-16 12:08:06 UTC
Kenrailae wrote:
All of which is purely speculation and directly counter to Eve.

It's actaully really solid "speculation". CCP statistics state that characters engaging in PvP have more sustain than characters that lose no ships. Combining this with more characters having *lots of fun*, *over and over again*, it's obviously decent. Furthermore, it fulfills the intrinsic reward system that CCP's stating it would like to replace extrinsic rewards with -- that includes the initiative of learning and getting great at the game.

There's obviously no rebuttal for this, because more characters having fun, more subs from entertainment, and more characters for other types of content is exactly the direction of this game that's mentioned by Fanfest keynotes.

Rivr Luzade wrote:
If already in a corp, they can train another char on the same account or get an alt account to fight in RVB. Or they actually do something in this sandbox that gives them a purpose, gives them excitement and confidence and something to progress through and create a true player achievement.

As mentioned in other threads, how would they realize what gives them excitement and confidence if they haven't tried it? How can they try it if they forego all of their "unlocks" from SP with a fresh character? It's actually really counter-intuitive, this suggestion, for developing the idea of "interesting progression" (if their character so simply becomes worthless for their interests).

It's more to be said for the validity of learning environments and newbie-encouraging content.

Rivr Luzade wrote:
Your "plausible" things are not going to happen, especially not the first one, as "min-maxing is pretty central with the game". If people cannot be bothered to fly around now to find fights or take actions to participate in player-provided fight wars now, they will certainly not start doing it after they are given arenas where they can just press a button and get a fight.

Technically, this whole statement is mitigated by arenas only being "on" for one hour per uptime or something. How simple the compromise is!

"SP is helpful for the game?" Here's all of the research on motivation -- it says the opposite! What purpose does it serve, then? Starter corps are non-competitive. Sov is unchallenged. "Fix sov!" you say? Remove SP.

Samillian
Angry Mustellid
#43 - 2015-09-16 12:22:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Samillian
Rek Seven: Thank you for the clarification although It saddens me that you are automatically assuming that anyone with a opinion different to yours is not open to reasoned argument.

In this case I standby my original post, it is not arenas so much as the track the introduction of instanced game puts EvE on that concerns me, I honestly don't believe a sandbox environment can survive the introduction of instanced game play. Show me proof it can and I will reconsider my position.

NBSI shall be the whole of the Law

Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#44 - 2015-09-16 12:28:46 UTC
Samillian wrote:
Rek Seven: Thank you for the clarification although It saddens me that you are automatically assuming that anyone with a opinion different to yours is not open to reasoned argument.

In this case I standby my original post, it is not arenas so much as the track the introduction of instanced game puts EvE on that concerns me, I honestly don't believe a sandbox environment can survive the introduction of instanced game play. Show me proof it can and I will reconsider my position.

"Slippery slope" is a logical fallacy and is unhelpful for further discussion.

"SP is helpful for the game?" Here's all of the research on motivation -- it says the opposite! What purpose does it serve, then? Starter corps are non-competitive. Sov is unchallenged. "Fix sov!" you say? Remove SP.

Jacek Cygan
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#45 - 2015-09-16 12:32:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Jacek Cygan
i will say that again, arenas are not needed - forcing to play on test server is stupid, but i think FW needs some improvement its where new pvp players belongs
Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#46 - 2015-09-16 12:32:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Kenrailae
Dror wrote:
Kenrailae wrote:
All of which is purely speculation and directly counter to Eve.

It's actaully really solid "speculation". CCP statistics state that characters engaging in PvP have more sustain than characters that lose no ships. Combining this with more characters having *lots of fun*, *over and over again*, it's obviously decent. Furthermore, it fulfills the intrinsic reward system that CCP's stating it would like to replace extrinsic rewards with -- that includes the initiative of learning and getting great at the game.

There's obviously no rebuttal for this, because more characters having fun, more subs from entertainment, and more characters for other types of content is exactly the direction of this game that's mentioned by Fanfest keynotes.




Ha ha ha.... Ha ha.... ha. Whew, THAT was a good laugh.


'Statistics' and 'Obviously no rebuttal'..... Yet the monkey who thinketh he is tall cannot provide a solid fact. Come now, if you're going to start quoting statistics, let's see some of these CCP quotes, and let's see undeniable proof that your proposed arena is going to be inherently fun, will draw more subs, and how arena's are the type of 'other content' that CCP was intending.

Here's your rebuttal: CCP has had 12 years now(or is it 11) to add your arena, and have consistently chosen not to. They have added things that restrict the range of things you can bring into combat(no caps in high sec, gate sizes on FW complexes, WH mass limits), but CCP has, time and again, stuck to its roots. As long as its not against the EULA, it's pretty much free game. CCP has also maintained the ability for players to go out and DO these things.

Effectively, you have nothing. Contract me your stuff and uninstall.



https://www.themittani.com/columns/alod-credit-card-warlord


^THIS is why Eve is beautiful, and why 'instanced PVP' is horrible.




Jacek Cygan wrote:
i will say that again, arenas are not needed - forcing to play on test server is stupid, but i think FW needs some improvement its where new pvp players belongs



Problem with FW is alot of those duders are as dramatic as middle school girls. Over 2mil isk frigates..... Le sigh.

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal

Samillian
Angry Mustellid
#47 - 2015-09-16 12:40:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Samillian
Dror wrote:
Samillian wrote:
Rek Seven: Thank you for the clarification although It saddens me that you are automatically assuming that anyone with a opinion different to yours is not open to reasoned argument.

In this case I standby my original post, it is not arenas so much as the track the introduction of instanced game puts EvE on that concerns me, I honestly don't believe a sandbox environment can survive the introduction of instanced game play. Show me proof it can and I will reconsider my position.

"Slippery slope" is a logical fallacy and is unhelpful for further discussion.



Please, feel free to contribute when you finally have something worthwhile to add.

NBSI shall be the whole of the Law

Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#48 - 2015-09-16 12:41:34 UTC
The only people who are being 'forced' to play on the test server are the ones who dont want a sandbox and non-consensual PvP to be made impossible.

I have absolutely no problem with arenas that can be broken into. I had no problems with Dojo's until it was clear they could not be broken into (among other issues).

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

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Amber Starview
Doomheim
#49 - 2015-09-16 12:42:11 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
speak for yourself

i'm openly asking you why the test server or dead space pockets does not satisfy? and why you think removing all chance of interference is good for a game designed with that playstyle in mind?


so your saying you dislike the alliance tourament too because it's protected ?

AT is promoted and endorsed by ccp and loved by many players I'm not sure how this isn't "EVE" enough



Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#50 - 2015-09-16 12:44:26 UTC
  1. How can arenas prepare for real PVP if you cannot have "real" PVP in these arenas? Real PVP is about unforeseen events and coincidences, it is about reacting to these events. You do not get these events in an arena, you cannot be prepared in an arena for real PVP.
  2. That can easily be explained on the test server as modules do not cost a lot there and you can actually test things on the test server without bankrupting yourself. Or you can test them with your corp mates or in E-Uni or RVB in a proper testing environment with experienced and capable people under real circumstances.
  3. It is already easy, as I have described above. What it requires is some ingenuity and imagination, which goes right back my stance in the How to safe EVE more Newbs thread and that we do not need daft people in the game.
  4. See above and above.
  5. This certainly does not create a way to determine who's most skilled in the game because the arena system takes away skill to compete and survive in PVP to begin with. There is no randomness to arenas, no sudden turns of events or third-parties appearing on your grid to mess with the ongoing fight. What you might learn is who can slaughter newbs and less capable people the most and fastest in a controlled environment, nothing more.
  6. Casual activities already exist, as described above.
  7. How does something add to the sandbox (which is about player creations and player driven events and developments) when it takes away many elements of the sandbox and educates people that the game is taking care of their PVP needs by setting them up with other people? People do not know what the sandbox is? Then these people should be shown the Butterfly Effect. This trailer illustrates very clearly what the sandbox is about.
  8. Weren't you just moments ago writing about "real PVP"? Real PVP is not about fairness, real PVP is about overcoming obstacles and fighting the odds stacked against you and coming out on top. Fairness is something for tournaments. And you can guarantee fairness to large extend in things like I described above.
  9. That is one of the big problems with the arena system. It just works, no players need to do things to make it work except for pressing a button and then wait for another person to press a button. How well this kind of match making works is clearly visible in games like WOT or the same publisher's WOW where you get matched to teams and people way above your class and capabilities on a regular basis by the looks.
  10. Anyone can participate in RVB or in weekly held tournaments organized by some player (organization with enough resources and manpower to do this reliably).

--

Dror, you can try out anything with your first char. If you are in a corp, where's the problem? You hear from RVB or a similar organization and you can just join them and still stay in contact with your other guys/friends via chats and their coms. You do not necessarily need lots of SP to have fun in RVB or some public fleets (I remember from that other thread you are talking about that Spectre (iirc) was handing out Probes even with low skill fittings). You cannot participate in everything but this is the point of the skill system in EVE and in virtually any game: You unlock things as you progress through the game and available keys to unlock more tools. If their interests are BS from day 1, they go buy a character that actually has the necessary skills trained, and then can go die repeatedly in a fire as they deserve for their daftness and clinging to wrong expectations and demands.

The "learning environment and newbie-encouraging content" is a lot more real and engaging in entities like E-Uni, Appetite for Destruction, or public fleets than in a arena with only you there.

Mitigated? Nothing is mitigated. The main argument on the last page was "time restricted players would enjoy arenas". They usually do not even have the hour per day to play. And who decides when this hour starts and ends? And how much of that hour will be idle time because you need to wait for a suitable opponent? This also goes directly back to Rek Seven's post I commented on above the 2 dashes. If people look for easy PVP content because they are time restricted due to RL, they will not look for real roams anymore as they are cumbersome and require effort. They can just wait after the button press and watch videos while they wait for another person to also press a button. As it currently stands, this group of people grows and grows and instead of giving in to their wrong expectations, it is more important to re-educate them again into being proper players and a proper part of this game that lives from them flying around in space and be available to be challenged there.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#51 - 2015-09-16 12:45:41 UTC
Amber Starview wrote:
Daichi Yamato wrote:
speak for yourself

i'm openly asking you why the test server or dead space pockets does not satisfy? and why you think removing all chance of interference is good for a game designed with that playstyle in mind?


so your saying you dislike the alliance tourament too because it's protected ?

AT is promoted and endorsed by ccp and loved by many players I'm not sure how this isn't "EVE" enough






The AT goes on for a month or so of the Year. It is a CCP sponsored and ran event. We watch it and enjoy it, but we know just how much of a fallacy it is as far as actual representation of Eve. We enjoy it because we like to see the big groups who would usually just blob with a thousand harpies or 200 supers fail, because they are forced to fight on even terms. That and it usually showcases some of the most broken mechanics at the time so gives an idea for things to do on our own time if we should so choose.


We do NOT watch it and christen it a perfect representation of Eve nor want all of Eve made that way. An event as opposed to standard practice are entirely different things.

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal

Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#52 - 2015-09-16 12:47:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Daichi Yamato
it happens once a year and requires magic teleportation by devs. Its only for a select few, not the wider player base and lasts a finite amount of time, you have to play plex to enter etc etc

What is being asked for here is arena's that can be stop/started constantly. Can be handed out or accessed by everyone etc etc.

The AT is an entirely different kettle of fish that is being asked here. If i want to hunt someone who plays in the AT i can for roughly 50 weeks of the year.

Kenrailae wrote:



We do NOT watch it and christen it a perfect representation of Eve nor want all of Eve made that way. An event as opposed to standard practice are entirely different things.


^^

edit-

The AT actually goes to show the separation between real PvP and arena PvP. Its widely known that ships and equipment that works well in an arena might not work anywhere near as well in the sandbox.

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

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#53 - 2015-09-16 14:00:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
Daichi Yamato wrote:

The AT is an entirely different kettle of fish that is being asked here. If i want to hunt someone who plays in the AT i can for roughly 50 weeks of the year.


There would be nothing stopping you from hunting a target and killing them before/after their arena match... Or idk, entering yourself and killing them that way.

Daichi Yamato wrote:

I have absolutely no problem with arenas that can be broken into. I had no problems with Dojo's until it was clear they could not be broken into (among other issues).


That's fine. Let them me broken into but there would have to be consequences and rules to not make the whole thing pointless...
Samillian
Angry Mustellid
#54 - 2015-09-16 14:00:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Samillian
Amber Starview wrote:
Daichi Yamato wrote:
speak for yourself

i'm openly asking you why the test server or dead space pockets does not satisfy? and why you think removing all chance of interference is good for a game designed with that playstyle in mind?


so your saying you dislike the alliance tourament too because it's protected ?

AT is promoted and endorsed by ccp and loved by many players I'm not sure how this isn't "EVE" enough




The AT while it has its moments is on the whole unrealistic, overly exclusive and pointless. The end result has more often than not been a foregone conclusion and the collusion and outright cheating that has occurred in the past has often been its main redeeming feature.

Honestly having matches gate crashed by random gangs would be an improvement.

NBSI shall be the whole of the Law

Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#55 - 2015-09-16 14:08:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Daichi Yamato
Rek Seven wrote:


There would be nothing stopping you from hunting a target and killing them before/after their arena match... Or idk, entering yourself and killing them that way.


Having to wait until they are not hidden behind a magic wall is not sandbox.
Entering a fight that has contrived arena-style restrictions/rules and other gimmicks is not sandbox.

Whats to stop my target endlessly rolling arena's and minimising the time he is out of them because he knows im waiting for him?
Whats to stop you creating the same arena's inside the sandbox or on the SiSi server where non-consensual PvP is not allowed?

Rek Seven wrote:


That's fine. Let them me broken into but there would have to be consequences and rules to not make the whole thing pointless...


Combat probing.
Entering makes you suspect.

Everyone gets a nice warning your coming and you become a global target.

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

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#56 - 2015-09-16 14:39:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
Again you fail to understand what sand box actually means yet use it as your sole argument against this... Stations stop you from engaging your target but they don't stop this from being a sandbox game.

It's reasonable to assume that there would be a waiting period between matches where you and attack your target... I'm tired of people who make silly assumptions to base their arguments...

At the end of the day I don't really care. I would love to see how i shape up competing against other players but I have the arenas in star citizen and elite dangerous to give me my arena fix... I'm sure eve will keep gaining subscriptions and retaining new players by being the same game it has always been. Roll
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#57 - 2015-09-16 14:57:29 UTC
riiiiight, it took 11 years for the eve playerbase to realise there werent any arena's in eve and decided to start leaving....

actually the impenetrable walls of stations is also not sandbox. When incarna was in the works the majority of the eve player base were excited to be able to enter a station and hunt people within for a good bar brawl/shoot out.

Its also reasonable to assume that anyone wanting to avoid me can spam arena's one after the other to avoid interaction.

You say my arguments are silly but they really arent. You say i dnt know what sandbox is, but its really you who doesnt. You say im not willing to discuss but you wont answer any of the questions i put forward.

Its ok for star citizen and elite to have arena's. They arent as open a sandbox as eve with room for foul play. If PvP sliders and consensual PvP is your thing then cool, EVE's probably not for you.

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

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#58 - 2015-09-16 14:57:31 UTC
Kenrailae wrote:
Let's see some of these CCP quotes

Statistics
https://youtu.be/A92Ge2S8M1Y?t=2m57s

On Motivation
https://youtu.be/sbHqFgn4SOw?t=10m45s

So, the rebuttal, beyond asking for a source, is that having an arena seems less valid because the game hasn't ever had one?

Samillian wrote:
Please, feel free to contribute when you finally have something worthwhile to add.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6040289#post6040289 -- just a few posts above that.

In bold:
Rivr Luzade wrote:
1. How can arenas prepare for real PVP if you cannot have "real" PVP in these arenas? Real PVP is about unforeseen events and coincidences, it is about reacting to these events. You do not get these events in an arena, you cannot be prepared in an arena for real PVP. PvP is obviously more (and less) than Dscan. The very definition of PvP is the basic mechanics, flight maneuvers, and ship fittings interacting. Thus PvP in arenas is still PvP, especially as a learning environment. Isn't it plausible that playing the free roam meta is much more feasible after having confidence and experience with the basics?
2. That can easily be explained on the test server as modules do not cost a lot there and you can actually test things on the test server without bankrupting yourself. Or you can test them with your corp mates or in E-Uni or RVB in a proper testing environment with experienced and capable people under real circumstances. If not supporting play on the main server, what criticism is there of arenas on the main server?
3. It is already easy, as I have described above. What it requires is some ingenuity and imagination, which goes right back my stance in the How to safe EVE more Newbs thread and that we do not need daft people in the game. Then why aren't there any tournaments prevalent?
4. See above and above.
5. This certainly does not create a way to determine who's most skilled in the game because the arena system takes away skill to compete and survive in PVP to begin with. There is no randomness to arenas, no sudden turns of events or third-parties appearing on your grid to mess with the ongoing fight. What you might learn is who can slaughter newbs and less capable people the most and fastest in a controlled environment, nothing more. How is winning on even ground not skillful?
6. Casual activities already exist, as described above. The point is play and prevalence on the main server.
7. How does something add to the sandbox (which is about player creations and player driven events and developments) when it takes away many elements of the sandbox and educates people that the game is taking care of their PVP needs by setting them up with other people? People do not know what the sandbox is? Then these people should be shown the Butterfly Effect. This trailer illustrates very clearly what the sandbox is about. That rarely happens.
8. Weren't you just moments ago writing about "real PVP"? Real PVP is not about fairness, real PVP is about overcoming obstacles and fighting the odds stacked against you and coming out on top. Fairness is something for tournaments. And you can guarantee fairness to large extend in things like I described above. More "no true scotsman" fallacious arguments.
9. That is one of the big problems with the arena system. It just works, no players need to do things to make it work except for pressing a button and then wait for another person to press a button. How well this kind of match making works is clearly visible in games like WOT or the same publisher's WOW where you get matched to teams and people way above your class and capabilities on a regular basis by the looks. Successful gameplay is a problem?
10. Anyone can participate in RVB or in weekly held tournaments organized by some player (organization with enough resources and manpower to do this reliably). Point 3 is the same. A decent percentage of fresh subs probably don't even make it to corps because of minimum SP limits and how this effects further applications. This sort of min-maxing "emergence" scales through all of gameplay, because there are very few consequences promoting decency in the game.


Samillian wrote:
The AT while it has its moments is on the whole unrealistic, overly exclusive and pointless.

No sports are deemed as such, because their value is entertainment.

On other points, the compromise remains that the arena could plausibly only be open at specific intervals. An obvious option is after restart, where the PCU is low. Another is that they rotate.

"SP is helpful for the game?" Here's all of the research on motivation -- it says the opposite! What purpose does it serve, then? Starter corps are non-competitive. Sov is unchallenged. "Fix sov!" you say? Remove SP.

Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#59 - 2015-09-16 15:24:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
Daichi Yamato wrote:
riiiiight, it took 11 years for the eve playerbase to realise there werent any arena's in eve and decided to start leaving....

actually the impenetrable walls of stations is also not sandbox. When incarna was in the works the majority of the eve player base were excited to be able to enter a station and hunt people within for a good bar brawl/shoot out.

Its also reasonable to assume that anyone wanting to avoid me can spam arena's one after the other to avoid interaction.

You say my arguments are silly but they really arent. You say i dnt know what sandbox is, but its really you who doesnt. You say im not willing to discuss but you wont answer any of the questions i put forward.

Its ok for star citizen and elite to have arena's. They arent as open a sandbox as eve with room for foul play. If PvP sliders and consensual PvP is your thing then cool, EVE's probably not for you.


The point was that there is competition out there while eve is stuck in the past, genius. Do you seriously believe some eve players haven't gone over to other games?

You can make silly assumptions all you want but that doesn't make them reasonable when talking about an idea. Reasonable would be to say "i would be happy with X as long as you can't do Y".

The difference is i want eve to develop and improve while you fear change.

Dude i have been playing longer than you and have a thousand more kills than you! What do you mean eve isn't for me?

I would be happy to answer your questions but first, do me a favor and google what sand box games are because you still appear to be using the term wrong.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#60 - 2015-09-16 15:32:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
Don't call it "real PVP" in this case. You do not need to consider Dscan in an arena, you do not need to consider gate activity or on grid action (like new people arriving, combatants leaving, your people dying, position of your people or yourself in relation to new people coming in, and so on) in an arena where there is no such things. You would teach them the wrong basics. If people get to expect (and they will get there, inevitably) that no-one can interfere with them, they will have a bad surprise in real, open-world PVP. And, as much as people currently hate Troll ceptors and do not fight them or cannot because they run, people will not want to PVP in the open-world because it circumstances are not under their control and change without them being able to do something against this. Thus, they will stick to the arenas and even less people are left for true/real PVP.
Therefore, it is not plausible for new players (in particular those of the current, rotten and spoiled gamer generation) to hop out of arenas as this would require more effort and would be less convenient.

I am not not supporting play on the main server. That is why I said it is best done in E-Uni or RVB. What I say is that there are things that you can explain or show case better on the test server because you do not have the financial aspect there that constraint wallets impose on the real server. This could be particularly interesting for younger, less financially apt pilots; however, I do not say anywhere that it is the only and most suitable way to teach people.
Judging by your bold text and your false focus on this point, am I right in assuming that you would want the material wasted in arenas to be free of charge? Because it sounds like that when you try to compare a learning simulation envelope on Sisi to real fights with real losses.

Because people are lazy. People are convenience driven. They rather want things given to them instead of making things on their own. See above for my description of this kind of players. Or because people do not want to compete in a tournament on a regular basis because, for instance, it is not the kind of PVP they search for. Nevertheless, the opportunity is there. To tell the truth, I find it particularly interesting that CFC does not do this more regularly. One corp had this Theomachy event recently, but that's about it. It just shows that people do not seem to be interested in it. Or that people are not willing to put up with the organization effort and just want things handed to them like in a theme park.

It is skillful, but only so much. There are no "even grounds" in the real PVP. There is always a disadvantage stacked against you or your opponent. There are no limitations on what can happen to you or your opponent as opposed to arenas.

Yes? Have I not described more than enough casual activities on TQ? If not, please show me what I have forgotten. I think I have been very thorough with my examples, both in this thread as well as the Save Newbs thread.

Well, welcome to the sandbox. And you want to make it even less likely to happen by taking away even more people from the open world and stuff them in arenas. Good that you see it, too. I also do not see where I said it is bound to happen often. The trailer showcases what the sandbox is capable of doing if you use it. The outcome of your actions, however, depend on interaction with other players and the chance to start interaction with them. Arenas take a lot away from that.

*not arguing about #8 as there is nothing to argue about provided*

It is not successful. At all. if you get matched with a superior player in a Cruiser while you are in your T1 frigate, this is not successful (and this is, kind of, what is currently happening in WOT/W). Furthermore, it is also not possible to take player experience into account in match making and this is a huge part of what defines EVE. I do not consider myself a good solo PVPer, but I would have no problem shredding a person even if we had the same fit for our ships. Over and over. Other people would just create new chars on their accounts (not new accounts, just new chars on the existing accounts) to be able to play against players of their "weight class" but outperform them in fact with their vast personal skills. This is only one of the many problems with arenas in EVE.
It contradicts a little bit with my previous statement about fair fights, however, people would expect fair fights in these arenas. Fights where they are in equal footing with their opponent. This is hardly doable in EVE.

There are no SP limits in RVB and sure as hell not in E-Uni who are specifically set up to educate new players (and old players alike). They also have a very active and engaged community which involves people into a social environment if they so wish. What CCP needs to do is to make people more aware of these entities and funnel (at least suggest this to players) them into these from starter corps instead of removing SP or attributes or something.
Well, this is what EVE is. Try to change this way of thinking. Make it your purpose to set up a nice weekly event/tournament and make people to want to participate in it rather than ruin it. Too hard? Shame, isn't it?

I am clearly typing way too much...Ugh

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.