These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#4021 - 2016-01-18 20:43:01 UTC
Tippia wrote:
What made them easier?
Their lower security status and higher population. Thing which CCP did not patch. Gankers are lazy, of course they are going to eventually gravitate towards the naturally easy spots.

Tippia wrote:
…which the attacker also has to worry about, courtesy of the quirks of Leval 1 AI. You know, the thing that mission-runners were complaining about and claimed would ruin things forever, even though it had been a known and solved problem for years.
Except a large portion of the time of the time NPCs don't swap, and as stated before, the mission runner is already damaged, reduced cap and reduced ammo from the NPC. You can't pretend they aren't at a disadvantage.

Tippia wrote:
No. You're having a discussion with someone you can't bamboozle with simple rhetorics and fallacies. Since that's all you have, you grow frustrated and have to resort to ad hominems such as this to cover up your failure, and it's this continued and desperate reliance on bad-faith (or just plain bad) argumentation that is your problem.
There's no ad hominems, you are a troll. I was under this impression this was common knowledge. I'm done circling with you over this.

Tippia wrote:
…except for the changes in aggression; the multiple changes in response time; the changes in ownership flagging; the changes in AI (which in spite of their whinging works to their advantage); the changes in insurance — all of which made them harder, costlier, and less valuable to kill.
And yet ganking is still incredibly easy, low investment and high reward.

Tippia wrote:
Meanwhile, gankers have seen no buffs to speak of. The one thing people try to point to as a buff was just them remaining at status quo in spite of a massive nerf directly aimed at them. Their not getting it worse is not the same being buffed.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. **** right off. There have been plenty, this has been discussed before and I'm not going round the houses with another of you people claiming everything that boosts gankers ability to gank isn't a buff, while anything from a graphical change is considered a buff for carebears. Troll confirmed.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#4022 - 2016-01-18 20:47:02 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Its funny how the poster of original comment I answered to doesn't have to show any evidence yet when I point out a very well known event that took place at a time when there was a higher number of people in game I have to suddenly provide a set of graphs, devs blogs and news reports.
Hey, Tippia has been explaining how evidence is always demanded for claims. You are claiming that there is now less ganking than in previous times while it seems to me that there is as much if not more ganking now and on top of that a reduced number of players online.

I think the reality is that ganking is generally more prevalent now, not only due to improvements to the game which have made ganking easier, but improvements in the organisation and strategies used by gankers making it far more commonplace. If you want to prove otherwise though I'd honestly love to see some verifiable proof.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#4023 - 2016-01-18 20:49:29 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Their lower security status and higher population.
Lower security status and higher population than the 0.52 Irjunen (and nearby 0.45 Inari) with one of the best mission agents in the game?

Quote:
Except a large portion of the time of the time NPCs don't swap, and as stated before, the mission runner is already damaged, reduced cap and reduced ammo from the NPC.
…if they're stupid. They could also choose not to be damaged, not to have reduced cap (which the attacker will have too, by the way), and have plenty enough ammo to deal with this mission, a few aggressors, and more.

Quote:
There's no ad hominems, you are a troll.
Make up your mind.

Quote:
And yet
…nothing. Their risks were mechanically reduced; they didn't have to compensate for anything or manage any risk because the game took care of it for them.

Quote:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. **** right off. There have been plenty
Such as…?
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#4024 - 2016-01-18 20:52:39 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Please provide verifiable evidence of this claim.


Between the years of 2011 and 2013 EVE grew by 150,000

At this time we had the ice interdictions in which an unparalleled number of miners were put to the sword. So many that CCP decided to step in with a ham fisted barge buff that went and dumped a load of HP rather than improving the fitting room, thus ending the ice interdictions along with profitable barge ganking.

There is simply no truth to the statement that violance in EVE is the reason for the loss in subs, if anything the evidence shows its the other way around. As the game has become safer population has gone down.
Vic Jefferson
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#4025 - 2016-01-18 20:55:28 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Gankers hang around in the newbie areas of the game because they are too scared to actually risk anything of value, then they get better and better at what they do, then complain when CCP takes steps to reduce their advantage over the newbies.


Gross oversimplification of a very complex ecosystem of opportunities for antagonist gameplay.

Different antagonist game play options would be much more attractive if the mechanics favored them. Ganking in Highsec is the lowest effort, lowest entry bar, cheapest, and the highest ISK killed/hour option, so it is not surprise that most antagonist minded people look there for easy kills, and the largest and most successful organizations are based around HS.

You can hunt in null for hours and hours, and find nothing, or you can farm up kills in Hi Sec with relative ease and consistency. Basically the distances and mechanics in null and low keep people, even very AFK people, extremely safe the majority of the time. If this were to change, you might just see other antagonist game play options open up. Why hunt a wild hulk when you can just get a factory farmed one, why stalk a freighter for days and hours in null when they will literally just auto pilot into your trap?

If you extensively try being the bad guy in both areas, you will quickly find which one is more optimal. Part of the blame lays on null being so safe these days - you literally have to squeeze the content out of it, rather than High Sec where the kill mails flow.

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#4026 - 2016-01-18 20:58:20 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
I think the reality is that ganking is generally more prevalent now,


Where is the evidence for this statement? Its very clear to see barge ganking is a shadow of what it used to be.


Lucas Kell wrote:

not only due to improvements to the game which have made ganking easier


Such as?


Lucas Kell wrote:

If you want to prove otherwise though I'd honestly love to see some verifiable proof.



You have seen this proof, over the span of several years. From the killboards showing a clear drop off in ganks to CCP stating that less ganking happens. We also have some very clear historical events that are no longer possible such as mass battleship ganking no longer happening, interdictions no longer happening, concord no longer being able to be tanked, much faster concord response times that have reduced the number of viable targets and thus lowing the numbers ganked.
Neuntausend
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#4027 - 2016-01-18 20:59:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Neuntausend
That's an interesting train of thought right there. The entry bar for War Decs has been raised, canflipping and timer-fuckery got taken away, only ganking still remains as it has been.

No wonder that's what people are doing.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#4028 - 2016-01-18 21:01:56 UTC
Vic Jefferson wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Gankers hang around in the newbie areas of the game because they are too scared to actually risk anything of value, then they get better and better at what they do, then complain when CCP takes steps to reduce their advantage over the newbies.


Gross oversimplification of a very complex ecosystem of opportunities for antagonist gameplay.

Different antagonist game play options would be much more attractive if the mechanics favored them. Ganking in Highsec is the lowest effort, lowest entry bar, cheapest, and the highest ISK killed/hour option, so it is not surprise that most antagonist minded people look there for easy kills, and the largest and most successful organizations are based around HS.

You can hunt in null for hours and hours, and find nothing, or you can farm up kills in Hi Sec with relative ease and consistency. Basically the distances and mechanics in null and low keep people, even very AFK people, extremely safe the majority of the time. If this were to change, you might just see other antagonist game play options open up. Why hunt a wild hulk when you can just get a factory farmed one, why stalk a freighter for days and hours in null when they will literally just auto pilot into your trap?

If you extensively try being the bad guy in both areas, you will quickly find which one is more optimal. Part of the blame lays on null being so safe these days - you literally have to squeeze the content out of it, rather than High Sec where the kill mails flow.


You managed to be wrong is every single thing you just said. If ganking is super easy why is it so rare and done by so few groups? If null sec space is so risk free why do the number of ships killed dwarf highsec by millions?
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#4029 - 2016-01-18 21:02:37 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Between the years of 2011 and 2013 EVE grew by 150,000

At this time we had the ice interdictions in which an unparalleled number of miners were put to the sword. So many that CCP decided to step in with a ham fisted barge buff that went and dumped a load of HP rather than improving the fitting room, thus ending the ice interdictions along with profitable barge ganking.

There is simply no truth to the statement that violance in EVE is the reason for the loss in subs, if anything the evidence shows its the other way around. As the game has become safer population has gone down.
But again, that's not evidence that EVE was at it's most violent then. That's simply you saying a lot of miners died, which they did, but no more than die in any other ganking event these days in a shorter period of time.

Also, while I haven't claimed that violence in eve causes a loss of subs, I'd certainly say there's anecdotal evidence that suggests some new players that get ganked, particularly ones that join with no friends already in game dislike the experience and it puts them off.

Personally I don't think it's a good thing to have veteran players spending all day preying on rookies, and would much rather see a much more structured and balanced approach to it. The way it is at the moment it's like survival games like rust, where you spend 4 hours gathering logs and rocks with another rock just to have a fully armored guy blow you up, smash though your wall, death you on your workbench and build a wall in front of your door. It costs more than is gained and is done for no reason other than a windup. Pretty much get in after a reset or get trolled. EVE has no resets though.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Neuntausend
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#4030 - 2016-01-18 21:09:45 UTC
Who's saying the guys on the recieving end of a gank are mostly rookies, though?

And what makes a player a rookie? If a 5 years character sits in a retriever, is he a rookie? If a 6 months player sits in a hulk, is he a rookie?
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#4031 - 2016-01-18 21:10:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Lucas Kell wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Yes there is. Just because something is an opinion doesn't mean it can't be wrong.
You can hold the opinion that the moon is made of cheese all you like; it's still wrong, no matter how much of an opinion it is.
Nope, it's factually inaccurate, but it's not wrong.

What definition of wrong are you using where being factually inaccurate isn't the same as wrong? They are synonyms.

Everyone can hold opinions that they have a personal preference for. Things like my favorite color is blue. I like pizza. Eve is great because every time we undock we are at risk of being shot. Those types of opinions can never be wrong because they can't be verified outside of the fact that I believe them.

But if I were to state an opinion that the moon is made of cheese, that the Earth is flat or that the holocaust never happened; then no matter how strongly I believe those things, they are still misconceptions because different facts can be verified. They aren't valid just because I might believe them. They are still wrong regardless.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#4032 - 2016-01-18 21:11:03 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Where is the evidence for this statement? Its very clear to see barge ganking is a shadow of what it used to be.
LOL, so let me get this straight. You say ganking has gone down. I ask for evidence as I believe it is more common these days, and you are now asking me to provide proof of my claim, even though you are actively refusing to provide proof of yours? I'll have two of what you're smoking.

baltec1 wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
not only due to improvements to the game which have made ganking easier
Such as?
No clone costs, standing free jump clones (for swapping out those pesky implants or moving between hunting zones), the introduction of the bowhead, the removal of the hidden orca bay, freighter slots, just to name a few.

baltec1 wrote:
You have seen this proof, over the span of several years. From the killboards showing a clear drop off in ganks to CCP stating that less ganking happens. We also have some very clear historical events that are no longer possible such as mass battleship ganking no longer happening, interdictions no longer happening, concord no longer being able to be tanked, much faster concord response times that have reduced the number of viable targets and thus lowing the numbers ganked.
No, I haven't. When I used to play in highsec for the fist few years I played, not once did I get ganked, and very rarely did I see it. Now I see it in nearly every system, and I'm now usually slightly further away from the main ganking areas than where I used to play. I've seen absolutely no evidence that ganking has gone down, especially since logged on users is down so you would expect it to have drastically reduced even if staying at the same ratio. You say no interdictions happening, but every year there is a burn X, and last year it doubled up with burn war akini.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#4033 - 2016-01-18 21:15:03 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
But again, that's not evidence that EVE was at it's most violent then. That's simply you saying a lot of miners died, which they did, but no more than die in any other ganking event these days in a shorter period of time.



Please name a mass barge gank event in the recent past.

Lucas Kell wrote:

Also, while I haven't claimed that violence in eve causes a loss of subs, I'd certainly say there's anecdotal evidence that suggests some new players that get ganked, particularly ones that join with no friends already in game dislike the experience and it puts them off.


"We have tried and tried to validate the myth that griefing has a pronounced affect on new players - we have failed. The strongest indicators for a new player staying with EVE are associated with social activity: joining corps, using market and contract systems, pvping, etc. Isolating players away from the actual sandbox seems very contrary to what we would like to accomplish."

CCP Rise in response to someone saying what you just did.


[/quote]
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#4034 - 2016-01-18 21:18:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Lucas Kell wrote:
But again, that's not evidence that EVE was at it's most violent then. That's simply you saying a lot of miners died, which they did, but no more than die in any other ganking event these days in a shorter period of time.

Again, average mining ship losses per day:
            Q1 2008   2015 (worst month)
Procurer     17        49.0
Retriever   115.8       6.8
Covetor      30.0       1.3
       ∑    162.8      57.1           — 2.85:1

Skiff         2.5      24.6
Mackinaw     28.5       3.1
Hulk         67.3       1.7
       ∑     98.3      29.4           — 3.34:1

That's 3× higher back in 2008, so “no more than die these days” doesn't really sound like an accurate description…
In the period directly following this miner massacre — one might even make some wordplay on the theme of “armageddon” — EVE saw what's probably its biggest growth in its entire history.

e: How can copy/pasting a number be this hard?! Gah!

Quote:
Also, while I haven't claimed that violence in eve causes a loss of subs, I'd certainly say there's anecdotal evidence that suggests some new players that get ganked, particularly ones that join with no friends already in game dislike the experience and it puts them off.
…and that anecdotal evidence doesn't really matter in the face of the fact that CCP cannot find any evidence to support the notion that griefing drives new players away.

The anecdotal evidence in question just further reinforces how a lack of social connections drive players away, not the ganks.

Quote:
No clone costs, standing free jump clones (for swapping out those pesky implants or moving between hunting zones), the introduction of the bowhead, the removal of the hidden orca bay, freighter slots, just to name a few.
Clone costs weren't really a ganker buff since gankers didn't have to update them very often, nor were the clones very costly to begin with. Jump clones have always been free for any organised corp. The bowhead offers no benefit to gankers that they didn't already have. How something that makes freighters harder to gank is a buff to gankers is something you need to explain in more detail. I'll grant you the removal of the gank-safe Orca, though. So that's a total of one…
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#4035 - 2016-01-18 21:35:48 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
But again, that's not evidence that EVE was at it's most violent then. That's simply you saying a lot of miners died, which they did, but no more than die in any other ganking event these days in a shorter period of time.

Again, average mining ship losses per day:
            Q1 2008   2015 (worst month)
Procurer     17        49.0
Retriever   115.8       6.8
Covetor      30.0       1.3
       ∑    162.8      57.1           — 2.85:1

Skiff         2.5      24.6
Mackinaw     28.5       3.1
Hulk         67.3       1.7
       ∑     98.3      29.4           — 3.34:1

That's 3× higher back in 2008, so “no more than die these days” doesn't really sound like an accurate description…
In the period directly following this miner massacre — one might even make some wordplay on the theme of “armageddon” — EVE saw what's probably its biggest growth in its entire history.

e: How can copy/pasting a number be this hard?! Gah!

Quote:
Also, while I haven't claimed that violence in eve causes a loss of subs, I'd certainly say there's anecdotal evidence that suggests some new players that get ganked, particularly ones that join with no friends already in game dislike the experience and it puts them off.
…and that anecdotal evidence doesn't really matter in the face of the fact that CCP cannot find any evidence to support the notion that griefing drives new players away.

The anecdotal evidence in question just further reinforces how a lack of social connections drive players away, not the ganks.

Quote:
No clone costs, standing free jump clones (for swapping out those pesky implants or moving between hunting zones), the introduction of the bowhead, the removal of the hidden orca bay, freighter slots, just to name a few.
Clone costs weren't really a ganker buff since gankers didn't have to update them very often, nor were the clones very costly to begin with. Jump clones have always been free for any organised corp. The bowhead offers no benefit to gankers that they didn't already have. How something that makes freighters harder to gank is a buff to gankers is something you need to explain in more detail. I'll grant you the removal of the gank-safe Orca, though. So that's a total of one…


This whole thing is giving me flashbacks to the rage posts by miners in 2012.
Neuntausend
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#4036 - 2016-01-18 21:37:42 UTC
Tippia wrote:
How something that makes freighters harder to gank is a buff to gankers is something you need to explain in more detail. I'll grant you the removal of the gank-safe Orca, though. So that's a total of one…


Freighter pilots now have the option to reduce their HP by fitting Nanofiber Internal Structures
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#4037 - 2016-01-18 21:40:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Indahmawar Fazmarai
Quoting myself:

Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
(...)

EVE population is going down because loses more players than earns. The main source of lost players is PvE, which is both the most popular specialization and the one with poorest retention. Poor retention is caused by the limited nature of PvE content and the lack of socialization. Socialization can't be adressed since players who play alone have reasons to do so. The PvE content is limited because it is created by CCP and consumed passively by players. To extend PvE content and keep PvE players interested, PvE content must be generated by players.Thus PvE needs the abbility to inlfuence other players. That will increase the retention of PvE players by giving them continuously fresh PvE content. That increase in retention will be boosted by how the new gameplay can also gain players uninterested in the existing gameplay.

Must be noted that this only plugs the PvE hole. PvP also haves its own issues (specially in nullsec), but then, PvP is not my trade in EVE.


That summarizes my agenda. If I had to run for CSM, I would claim that my ultimate goal for EVE is the implementation of player generated PvE content as the best way to keep EVE large and healthy.

Now I leave you wading through Tippia's trolling...
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#4038 - 2016-01-18 21:40:39 UTC
Neuntausend wrote:
Tippia wrote:
How something that makes freighters harder to gank is a buff to gankers is something you need to explain in more detail. I'll grant you the removal of the gank-safe Orca, though. So that's a total of one…


Freighter pilots now have the option to reduce their HP by fitting Nanofiber Internal Structures


Point does still stand despite the fact that the bads still anti-tank their **** 5 years after been shown not to do that.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#4039 - 2016-01-18 21:45:17 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
That summarizes my agenda.
Too bad that none of the assertions made have been proved…
King Aires
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#4040 - 2016-01-18 22:11:23 UTC  |  Edited by: King Aires
Tippia wrote:

[code]            Q1 2008   2015 (worst month)
Procurer     17        49.0
Retriever   115.8       6.8
Covetor      30.0       1.3
       ∑    162.8      57.1           — 2.85:1

Skiff         2.5      24.6
Mackinaw     28.5       3.1
Hulk         67.3       1.7
       ∑     98.3      29.4           — 3.34:1[/code



You can make up whatever numbers you want. And you might very well be right about 2012 killboards missing things. But I know for damn sure these 2015 are complete BS.

Not only that, but where are you even getting your information from? Credible source or you are a liar.

And again, what in the hell does any of this ganking nonsense have to do with this thread? Ganking up and down and player average numbers up and down are not related. There is no causality. I would always assume the more people that are playing the game the more kills and ganks we would see on killboards, that is just common sense.