These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Avvy
Doomheim
#2801 - 2015-12-10 15:11:14 UTC
Gregor Parud wrote:
Solecist Project wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
Solecist Project wrote:

What a waste of time...

Instead of talking here, we should take matters into our own hands.
Sadly people don't work that way nowadays.


Hasn't logged in.

What? Me?
Hey, you do known I've been playing a lot, do you? :p


No I mean... that one.


As my post is above this one, I guess you mean me.

Well it's difficult to login when you don't have the game installed.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#2802 - 2015-12-10 15:13:24 UTC
I'm not.
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#2803 - 2015-12-10 16:17:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Indahmawar Fazmarai
Lan Wang wrote:
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
Solecist Project wrote:
Don't forget that PvPers do PvE, but PvErs don't do PvP.

Tbh this is all that's needed to realize which type of player has more value ...



Bingo.




PvPr claims that his e-peenis is bigger than yours; the evidence is that he says so. More news at 11. Roll

Further reading

From the blog linked above: "(...) Can I go up to someone and, with a straight face, tell them that a game in which the average player in a 3-hour play session will most likely only kill NPCs and not kill another player or have another player kill him, is a PvP game?" -Nosy Gamer.

As I said, what companies advertise (Empty roads! Exotic locations!) is very different than the average user experience (Traffic jams! Ugly suburbs!).

Maybe CCP shoudl start developing EVE based on what players pay for (PvE) and do (PvE) rather than hope that more PvP is going to sort those decaying user counts.


Do you have some sort of statistic which gives details of the people who "only" do pve, and people who pay a subscription to pve against those who pay subscriptions to pvp? who brings more money to ccp, the players who only do pve, never lose a ship and pay for gametime with plex bought for isk or the pvp'ers who pay subs, dont do pve and buy plex with rl cash to buy ships they lose everyday?


I posted above CCP statistics on the demographic weight of player archetypes. There you can see how 50% of the players (people, not accounts or characters, but people who gives money to CCP) are focused on PvE and barely PvP or only PvP against their will. Also CCP statistics on the average session as reported by Nozy Gamer show how player kills are only a fraction of a kill in a average 3 hours session, which by contrast sees lots of NPC kills. Also there's the Fanfest 2015 stats on how much damage is inflicted, with player to NPC damage being (IIRC) 68x more damage than all player-on-player damage, structures from Sovereignty II included.

We don't know who pays more money to CCP because CCP never shared that information, and it's difficult to estimate because it depends on who buys PLEX for real money, and CCP also never shared that information. We don't even know how many PLEXes they sell compared to subscriptions. And just to make things more complicated, there's AUR sells.

My guess is that, with the average being 1.4 to 1.6 accounts per subscriber, PvE types will be in the lower fork and PvP types will be in the upper fork. Personally i've never had more than 3 accounts simultaneously and only have bought PLEX with real cash occasionally for buying expensive hulls like Faction ships and Marauders. I've also bought AUR once.

Probably there's a strong correlation between player age and expense, so extending the average tenure of PvErs would also improve revenue per player. CCP gains nothing from having a large demographic with low revenue per player and a fast churn rate.
Avvy
Doomheim
#2804 - 2015-12-10 16:38:27 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Lan Wang wrote:
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
Solecist Project wrote:
Don't forget that PvPers do PvE, but PvErs don't do PvP.

Tbh this is all that's needed to realize which type of player has more value ...



Bingo.




PvPr claims that his e-peenis is bigger than yours; the evidence is that he says so. More news at 11. Roll

Further reading

From the blog linked above: "(...) Can I go up to someone and, with a straight face, tell them that a game in which the average player in a 3-hour play session will most likely only kill NPCs and not kill another player or have another player kill him, is a PvP game?" -Nosy Gamer.

As I said, what companies advertise (Empty roads! Exotic locations!) is very different than the average user experience (Traffic jams! Ugly suburbs!).

Maybe CCP shoudl start developing EVE based on what players pay for (PvE) and do (PvE) rather than hope that more PvP is going to sort those decaying user counts.


Do you have some sort of statistic which gives details of the people who "only" do pve, and people who pay a subscription to pve against those who pay subscriptions to pvp? who brings more money to ccp, the players who only do pve, never lose a ship and pay for gametime with plex bought for isk or the pvp'ers who pay subs, dont do pve and buy plex with rl cash to buy ships they lose everyday?


I posted above CCP statistics on the demographic weight of player archetypes. There you can see how 50% of the players (people, not accounts or characters, but people who gives money to CCP) are focused on PvE and barely PvP or only PvP against their will. Also CCP statistics on the average session as reported by Nozy Gamer show how player kills are only a fraction of a kill in a average 3 hours session, which by contrast sees lots of NPC kills. Also there's the Fanfest 2015 stats on how much damage is inflicted, with player to NPC damage being (IIRC) 68x more damage than all player-on-player damage, structures from Sovereignty II included.

We don't know who pays more money to CCP because CCP never shared that information, and it's difficult to estimate because it depends on who buys PLEX for real money, and CCP also never shared that information. We don't even know how many PLEXes they sell compared to subscriptions. And just to make things more complicated, there's AUR sells.

My guess is that, with the average being 1.4 to 1.6 accounts per subscriber, PvE types will be in the lower fork and PvP types will be in the upper fork. Personally i've never had more than 3 accounts simultaneously and only have bought PLEX with real cash occasionally for buying expensive hulls like Faction ships and Marauders. I've also bought AUR once.

Probably there's a strong correlation between player age and expense, so extending the average tenure of PvErs would also improve revenue per player. CCP gains nothing from having a large demographic with low revenue per player and a fast churn rate.



I don't think you'll ever know.

Each PLEX purchased from CCP is effectively a subscription, that can be used as a subscription or for other purposes.

Who buys the most PLEX PvPers or PvEers?

Who subscribes the most PvPers or PvEers?

We know a lot of PvPers also do PvE and genuine PvEers won't PvP (combat).

You could say that the game is originally designed for PvP. As such everyone PvP's, but we know that isn't actually the case.

So unless there is an indication of what your main focus is on the account I don't see how you can get any meaningful figures.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#2805 - 2015-12-10 16:51:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Gregor Parud
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
people, not accounts or characters, but people who gives money to CCP


Nice try at those smoke and mirrors again, you're purposely trying to hammer it in that we're talking about a person who might have more than one account thus trying to get us on board with the whole "see, all PVE". But it IS about accounts and that very much changes stuff for the reasons I already mentioned: PVP players do PVE, it's not mutually exclusive in that way. We do both.



Apart from that, the quote in that blog is already coloured and mistaken (love you Mike) assuming that's exactly what he tweeted. The question "Is EVE a PVP game or a game with PVP in it" is already biased because Mike is a hopeless carebear (<3), that's probably why the clown nose blog picked up on it. It leaves out the obvious 3rd option "is EVE a PVP game with PVE in it?" which of course the right answer. Without that 3rd and logical option the answer would be "a game with PVP in it" because technically it's not a pure PVP game and presto: smoke and mirrors.

EVE is a PVP game with PVE in it.



Nice try though.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#2806 - 2015-12-10 20:04:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
Then we get to your "see there's more pve players than pvp" which is of course a fallacy. A VAST majority of pvpers have high sec mission/mining alts, and lots of them, because it makes sense in many ways. Counting them as PVE players is hilarious because... they're alts, not independent PVE players.


You're absolutely wrong.

This is the truth of what do indivdual subscribers do with their accounts and characters.

Professionals (do everything): 30%
Entrepreneurs (do PvE and industry, barely move from highsec): 25%
Traditionals (play EVE as a ordinary MMO): 25%
Social (mostly socialize and skillqueue online) 12%
Aggressors (mostly do PvP): 8%

Those are CCP data from Fanfest 2015. As you may notice, PvP is irrelevant to Traditionals and a very minor acivity to Entrepreneurs, and is almost non-existant to Socials (since they barely undock...). That's 62% of individuals who don't pay CCP for PvP since they don't engage in PvP, but may suffer it occasionally.

These Fanfest data just confirmed what every PvEr aware of her environment already knew. EVE is not a PvP game, not by the numbers. And that is in blatant contradiction to what PvPrs think of themselves and the game, and what CCP used to think about the game. "PvP" is branding, but the real product is PvE.

Indah, your statement that 62% don't engage in pvp is a wrong reading of that data.

You seem to count professionals and aggressors as the only people in the game that pvp.

Yet, if you look at the:

- Socials: primary activity is socializing and travel and the amount of pvp they do is the same as the amount of pve
- Entrepreneurs: the amount of pvp they do is third largest and about the same as the amount of pve done by professionals
- Traditionals: a mix of everything but less than professionals. More pve than pvp, but the pvp still exists

The claim that PVE is the primary activity based on that data is only true when you completely discount the pvp done by those groups, but include the pve. That's not a fair or balanced approach to draw a conclusion from that the real product is pve.

Why include the pve of the socials but disregard the same amount of pvp?

Why disregard the pvp by entrepreneurs even though they are the third largest group of pvpers?

Why disregard the pvp done by traditionals, when the amount of tackling they do under the pvp stats is on par (but slightly behind) the amount of mining and missioning they do?

Why include the pve of those groups and use that as a way to claim pve is the main product, yet completely discount their involvement in pvp?

Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Further reading

From the blog linked above: "(...) Can I go up to someone and, with a straight face, tell them that a game in which the average player in a 3-hour play session will most likely only kill NPCs and not kill another player or have another player kill him, is a PvP game?" -Nosy Gamer.

In terms of presenting simple statistics, he does a good job.

Like all statistics though, the devil is in the analysis of what they actually mean and that's where I personally believe his analysis is lacking.

I don't PvE a lot, so when I do, I do it as efficiently as I can. So with an Ishtar running anomalies in nullsec I can semi-AFK kill on the order of 100-150 rats an hour. I don't know whether that is representative of most people, but based on my own lack of desire to kill rats, I'd assume that's not an unreasonable amount (but happy to be corrected on that to better understand if one rat kill every 30 odd seconds is not reasonable).

There is no way I can kill 100-150 players in the same time period, especially as I am mainly a solo/small gang pvper. It's rare that the large fights occur in game where people are reaching those levels of kills in a 60 minute time period.

Rats are dumb, easy to find and and easy to kill, while players take steps to make themselves harder to find and/or harder to kill.

So a simple comparison of rat kills to player kills isn't a true comparison of the amount of pvp vs pve.

There is more time involved in pvp getting into an engagement than there is actually shooting and not all engagements result in everyone being killed, even in epic fights. The reverse is true for pve.

Yet those associated activities (scouting, scanning, disengaging, repairing) are all still pvp activities that his analysis didn't include and his approach is heavily biased towards emphasising what pve achieves quickly, versus all the activities that make up pvp.

In a 3 hour session for example, I might run anomolies for an hour and get a 100 rat kills, then pvp for the next 2 hours and have 5-6 fights. I pvp way more than I pve, but using his simplistic approach, it would look like I hardly pvp at all and spend most of my time in pve.

His stats are valuable, but his analysis is lacking in my view; mainly because it isn't a really well developed method or rigorous analysis. It was simplistic, even if that wasn't his intention.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#2807 - 2015-12-10 20:21:40 UTC
Vic Jefferson wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
The sov changes feel rushed and don't really seem to be moving towards fun gameplay...
I was about to carefully consider your statement, then I realized the absurdity of anyone in your coalition complaining about how fun things are. There is no physical set of mechanics they can implement that would not result in your alliance fencing itself in from actual content, therefore actual engaging game play and fun.
Good lord man stop with the crying. In any online game there will always be one group or one person that is ahead of everyone else. Here it happens to be us. If it wasn't us it would be someone else. Thank your lucky stars that in EVE it only matters if you actually want to hold sov null in and around our area and get the **** over it.

The problems EVE have that prevent many players - especially new ones - enjoying the game have nothing to do with us and everything to do with bad mechanics, design and balance. If in the process of fixing those they shake up null to the point that we have to do something to keep ourselves ahead, great, but for the most part changes are needed elsewhere.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#2808 - 2015-12-11 12:06:05 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Here it happens to be us


Brave statement or perhaps just a hilarious one.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#2809 - 2015-12-11 16:25:30 UTC
Gregor Parud wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Here it happens to be us
Brave statement or perhaps just a hilarious one.
Indeed. Well people keep telling me we've won EVE and that we're so unstoppable, and honestly I've given up disputing it. If you are indeed correct and it's not us then the guy has even more reason to stop crying about the Imperium.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#2810 - 2015-12-11 18:38:59 UTC
Well... Without PVE industry, the PVP would cease to be.

Cannot pee pew if no one makes the ammo.

I have a unscientific feeling that people that PVP buy more PLEX because they do not want to PVE for isk.

Though I know people who used to trade to PVP.

But I remember the guy who spent $30 to lose it in low sec.

Though they have all quit the game now.

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server
Buzz Orti
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2811 - 2015-12-11 19:24:23 UTC
Captain Tardbar wrote:
Well... Without PVE industry, the PVP would cease to be.

Cannot pee pew if no one makes the ammo.
...

Market PvP does exist.

There is much less items available without hauling, and manufacturing.

Mission provides some items for PvP as well.

There is more than one way to PvP.

Builds ship in empty Quafe bottle.
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#2812 - 2015-12-11 19:30:22 UTC
Buzz Orti wrote:
Captain Tardbar wrote:
Well... Without PVE industry, the PVP would cease to be.

Cannot pee pew if no one makes the ammo.
...

Market PvP does exist.

There is much less items available without hauling, and manufacturing.

Mission provides some items for PvP as well.

There is more than one way to PvP.


Well I suppose markets are somewhat PVP, but no one posts kill mails about their wallet flashing.

Calling station traders elite PVPers would anger a few persons on here anyways.

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server
Solecist Project
#2813 - 2015-12-11 19:31:17 UTC
This reminds me of another one.

The weird mindset of pure PvErs tells them that killing miners is stupid,
because they provide the PvPers with ships.

Without PvErs, people would have no ships.

For some reason these people do not realize that we can use alts to mine ...
... and build our own ships just fine ...
... and we'd not be so daft to get us killed easily.

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#2814 - 2015-12-11 19:41:06 UTC
Solecist Project wrote:
This reminds me of another one.

The weird mindset of pure PvErs tells them that killing miners is stupid,
because they provide the PvPers with ships.

Without PvErs, people would have no ships.

For some reason these people do not realize that we can use alts to mine ...
... and build our own ships just fine ...
... and we'd not be so daft to get us killed easily.



Hrm... That means the PVPer has become a dirty miner and now PVE's.

Which either means they enjoy care bear PVE or are too unskilled at PVP to earn a profit at PVP itself.

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server
Yonis Kador
KADORCORP
#2815 - 2015-12-11 20:30:57 UTC
This PvP vs PvE debate drives me crazy. It's all PvP. Question: When a player infiltrates an organization and lies in wait for months before executing an asset/wallet heist, is that PvP? Combat is frequently part of the ruse but the plan only really requires attention to detail, organizational skills and patience. But most reasonable folks would assume this is PvP. Countless players are affected and losses often end corps/alliances.

So when an industrialist studies the map to identify a target (system) and engages in small-scale market manipulation, how is that not also PvP? His actions affect countless other players. He may even have set a goal ahead of time to run a particular corp out of system so he can better claim its resources. Or he may succeed in wreaking enough havoc to put a rival corp out of business either by consuming more resources more quickly or just being a general nuisance. This is not PvE.

So when I see a miner mining away in a belt, I assume that person is engaged in PvP. Simply by being in space he is a target and if he is interacting with other players in any way he contributes to pgc. Mining is a means to an end. While some miners mine for isk and do nothing else, most probably mine to fund some future goal. Can we know if that miner is working to obtain minerals enough to corner a regional market? Any goal beyond wealth? Can we know his contribution to pgc? This doesn't even take into account the great many folks who have mining/indy (work) alts which they use to fund their (fun) combat/griefer alts. Is that PvE?

To my mind, if your goal is to conquer New Eden and you believe you're laying the foundations of a future empire, you are not engaged in PvE.

It's just nuts to see folks label themselves into these disparate groups when, in a sandbox, everything is interconnected and player driven. I don't get it. You're all competing. Competing over resources or territory - but you're competing. And that's PvP.

YK
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#2816 - 2015-12-11 20:39:25 UTC
Yonis Kador wrote:
This PvP vs PvE debate drives me crazy. It's all PvP. Question: When a player infiltrates an organization and lies in wait for months before executing an asset/wallet heist, is that PvP? Combat is frequently part of the ruse but the plan only really requires attention to detail, organizational skills and patience. But most reasonable folks would assume this is PvP. Countless players are affected and losses often end corps/alliances.

So when an industrialist studies the map to identify a target (system) and engages in small-scale market manipulation, how is that not also PvP? His actions affect countless other players. He may even have set a goal ahead of time to run a particular corp out of system so he can better claim its resources. Or he may succeed in wreaking enough havoc to put a rival corp out of business either by consuming more resources more quickly or just being a general nuisance. This is not PvE.

So when I see a miner mining away in a belt, I assume that person is engaged in PvP. Simply by being in space he is a target and if he is interacting with other players in any way he contributes to pgc. Mining is a means to an end. While some miners mine for isk and do nothing else, most probably mine to fund some future goal. Can we know if that miner is working to obtain minerals enough to corner a regional market? Any goal beyond wealth? Can we know his contribution to pgc? This doesn't even take into account the great many folks who have mining/indy (work) alts which they use to fund their (fun) combat/griefer alts. Is that PvE?

To my mind, if your goal is to conquer New Eden and you believe you're laying the foundations of a future empire, you are not engaged in PvE.

It's just nuts to see folks label themselves into these disparate groups when, in a sandbox, everything is interconnected and player driven. I don't get it. You're all competing. Competing over resources or territory - but you're competing. And that's PvP.

YK


So by your definition there is no PVE in EVE.

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server
Yonis Kador
KADORCORP
#2817 - 2015-12-11 20:45:56 UTC
It's not "my" definition. It's the nature of the sandbox.

But sure, there's still ship spinning. Pretty sure that still counts as PvE.

(Unless you're racing against another player....)

Mira Stargazer
Epic Warfare
#2818 - 2015-12-11 20:49:01 UTC
Yonis Kador wrote:
It's not "my" definition. It's the nature of the sandbox.

But sure, there's still ship spinning. Pretty sure that still counts as PvE.

(Unless you're racing against another player....)



Ship spinning is defnitely PvP... I have seen threads about maximum number of spins, there is a counter you know. Big smile

I have feelings, I can smile - and murder while!
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#2819 - 2015-12-11 20:54:29 UTC
Yonis Kador wrote:
It's not "my" definition. It's the nature of the sandbox.

But sure, there's still ship spinning. Pretty sure that still counts as PvE.

(Unless you're racing against another player....)



I don't know.

The same logic could state there is no pvp in WoW because all the gold from killing mobs can be used to compete on the auction house.

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#2820 - 2015-12-11 20:58:26 UTC
Yonis Kador wrote:
This PvP vs PvE debate drives me crazy. It's all PvP.
That's not entirely true. The thing is, there are varying definitions of what is PvE and PvP, but in 99% of those cases everyone involved knows exactly what the other person is talking about, they simply want to argue semantics to be difficult and because they can't argue the actual point being made. The distinction between PvE and PvP is generally made to talk about specific types of mechanics. So when people in this thread say "PvE mechanics are dull", what they mean is "mechanics such as ratting and mining are dull". Almost everyone here knows this, and yet every single time some idiot will show up to explain to everyone how it's PvP. It's not constructive and just leads to endless circular arguments.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.