These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#4081 - 2016-01-19 13:45:50 UTC
King Aires wrote:



But Lucas, the mouth-breathers don't consider blowing up Freighters and Orcas and Bowheads ganking remember.


We don't consider them mining barges which is what was being talked about when those numbers were produced.
King Aires wrote:

Oh and Tippia saying that you linked to your 2008 sources by simply saying "I got them from CCP" is not actually linking them.


Tippia said the source was the Q1 report from CCP, how you you go look it up?
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#4082 - 2016-01-19 13:50:06 UTC
Captain Tardbar wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Captain Tardbar wrote:


I suspect PVP won't be the death of EVE, its the inability to keep up with emerging technologies and competing products that will.


This suggests that everyone cares about such things. Not all do, some of us don't care about the next big thing.

And even so, NO ONE is trying to compete with EVE, most of the games people like to call "competition" can't have more than a couple dozen people in the same place at the same time. Last night I played in 2 battles with more than 100 players per side, no tidi. When Elite and SC etc can do that i'll give them a look).

Quote:

Which is why CCP is betting big on Valkyrie. It will be their World of Tanks.


May they get rich with these low attention span MOBA lovers.


Large fights are over rated and mostly focus fire and getting cups of coffee in-between firing cycles.

Also when was the last large fight? Its been a while hasn't it.


Nope, last night. "Large fight" doesn't mean "epic huge TiDi fight". The clashes I've been in in Detorid this last week have been fun, mostly when we've been able to ignore these terrible small gang-centric sov fights. Hell, we did some old school POS bashing last night, that was more fun that whackamole sov.

The so-called competition games can't do what i experienced over this last holiday and weekend, and aren't trying to. I'm so very happy that they are in development because it means people who like that kind of smaller scale jet fighter action will have a place to go finally. A place that isn't here.

Quote:

Anyways... EVE players are a minority of the gaming universe and its quite amazing they have sustained their model so far which is why CCP put so much effort into Valkyrie. EVE is dead end for them. They'll keep it around for a while at least because of sentimental value. They won't put too much effort into after that.


Good. But EVe will last much longer than that, because not all gamers are 'immersion and instant gratification seekers'. I read your post in the Star citizen thread and there is nothing about this that i find even remotely interesting. So you'll have your place where you can play space pilot or space crew member or space marine, and folks like me will still have our old boring spread-sheets in space that we actually like. And everyone is happy.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#4083 - 2016-01-19 14:09:40 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
We don't consider them mining barges which is what was being talked about when those numbers were produced.
baltec. Here is a quote from you, which is what you were asked to prove:
baltec1 wrote:
EVE was growing at it fastest rate back when ganking was at its most violent.
Turning it into a discussion about mining barges was your diversionary tactic.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

King Aires
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#4084 - 2016-01-19 14:11:15 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
We don't consider them mining barges which is what was being talked about when those numbers were produced.
baltec. Here is a quote from you, which is what you were asked to prove:
baltec1 wrote:
EVE was growing at it fastest rate back when ganking was at its most violent.
Turning it into a discussion about mining barges was your diversionary tactic.



Goal posts went >>>>>>>> way

Baltec1 down
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#4085 - 2016-01-19 14:20:05 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
I showed you, that you are unwilling to follow information or links is not my problem.
No, you didn't. You simply restated that ice interdictions happened and still ignored the record breaking gank events from last year.


Which has nothing to do with what we were talking about which was specifically miners. It is fact that there are not as many barges getting killed as before, simply looking at the fact that ice interdictions no longer happen should be enough evidence alone to show this but as tippia has shown the numbers killed are down.

Given the huge number of nerfs to ganking over the years its moronic to insist there is more ganking going on. The potential targets for ganking has been drastically reduced along with the number of viable gank ships and the cost to gank is much larger than at any point in the past.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#4086 - 2016-01-19 14:25:40 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Lucas Kell wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
We don't consider them mining barges which is what was being talked about when those numbers were produced.
baltec. Here is a quote from you, which is what you were asked to prove:
baltec1 wrote:
EVE was growing at it fastest rate back when ganking was at its most violent.
Turning it into a discussion about mining barges was your diversionary tactic.


Very well.

EVE was growing at its fastest rate while it was possible to tank concord, concord response times were slower than today, all ships had much less tank and it was possible to gank stuff using fully insured battaleships that were effectively free.

That alone proved the comment that violence in EVE drives away players away is rubbish, the decline happened after all of the above was removed or heavily nerfed. So what I said is true, the population dropped at a point where you were never safer.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#4087 - 2016-01-19 14:33:11 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Which has nothing to do with what we were talking about which was specifically miners. It is fact that there are not as many barges getting killed as before, simply looking at the fact that ice interdictions no longer happen should be enough evidence alone to show this but as tippia has shown the numbers killed are down.
But that's not what you said. Look at your own quote, you are claiming that "EVE was growing at it fastest rate back when ganking was at its most violent". That's what you need to prove and that isn't just mining barges.

Also, Tippia is comparing total loss statistics with zkb losses. The QEN data she is using includes all losses to NPCs as well as to players. They are totally different statistics.

baltec1 wrote:
Given the huge number of nerfs to ganking over the years its moronic to insist there is more ganking going on. The potential targets for ganking has been drastically reduced along with the number of viable gank ships and the cost to gank is much larger than at any point in the past.
No, it's not, since there have also been buffs to ganking and well as a considerable amount of organisation that has gone in to make it a more popular activity. You say "the cost to gank is much larger" yet an empty freighter is still killboard green. Hell, the only killboard red barge is a procurer and that's only just. What does a common barge gank cost, 20m? Hardly breaking the bank, plus you don't have clone costs anymore. Not to mention that making isk is now shockingly easy, in addition to plex netting you nearly 5 times the amount of isk it would have got you in 2009.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#4088 - 2016-01-19 14:39:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Lucas Kell
baltec1 wrote:
Very well.

EVE was growing at its fastest rate while it was possible to tank concord, concord response times were slower than today, all ships had much less tank and it was possible to gank stuff using fully insured battaleships that were effectively free.

That alone proved the comment that violence in EVE drives away players away is rubbish, the decline happened after all of the above was removed or heavily nerfed. So what I said is true, the population dropped at a point where you were never safer.
That's not proof, that's you stating an opinion. And are you seriously suggesting that vast swathes of people left EVE because concord can't be tanked anymore and response times are quicker? You're saying that gankers are so pathetic that changes to their gameplay style which make it more challenging cause them to quit en masse? Seems to me that there's no provable causal link between space violence and player count, and it's more likely that the cause of the dropoff was the natural evolution of an aging MMO.

The real question around space violence vs population is whether modern day gamers would be more attracted to a game if they weren't killed and trolled by veteran players shortly after arrival, and whether or not CCP wants to increase server population or settle with a small, shrinking MMO.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#4089 - 2016-01-19 14:41:14 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
No, it's not, since there have also been buffs to ganking and well as a considerable amount of organisation that has gone in to make it a more popular activity. You say "the cost to gank is much larger" yet an empty freighter is still killboard green. Hell, the only killboard red barge is a procurer and that's only just. What does a common barge gank cost, 20m? Hardly breaking the bank, plus you don't have clone costs anymore. Not to mention that making isk is now shockingly easy, in addition to plex netting you nearly 5 times the amount of isk it would have got you in 2009.


You managed to list one buff to ganking and that was removal of the non scannable orga bay.

Today it is not possible to to gank barges profitably. It is also massively more expensive to gank the actual profitable targets due to hull costs, a reduction in time you have to kill the target and the added tank of the target. The nerfs to ganking far far overshadow that one buff.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#4090 - 2016-01-19 14:42:44 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
You managed to list one buff to ganking and that was removal of the non scannable orga bay.

Today it is not possible to to gank barges profitably. It is also massively more expensive to gank the actual profitable targets due to hull costs, a reduction in time you have to kill the target and the added tank of the target. The nerfs to ganking far far overshadow that one buff.
So removed clone costs weren't a buff? And the bowhead wasn't? Both of these things were mentioned too.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#4091 - 2016-01-19 14:43:02 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Lucas Kell wrote:
That's not proof, that's you stating an opinion.


No thats proof. All of them were mechanical changes that have made EVE safer all of which are listed in Dev and patch logs. There is no debate about them, the simple fact is that EVE was growing faster when the very mechanics of the game made it a much more dangerous place.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#4092 - 2016-01-19 14:45:19 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
So removed clone costs weren't a buff?


You warp the pod off, it cant die in highsec unless you chose to let it happen. Clone costs mean nothing.



King Aires wrote:

And the bowhead wasn't? Both of these things were mentioned too.


We use stations, we didn't even bother to use the orca.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#4093 - 2016-01-19 14:48:54 UTC
Bob Maths wrote:
Perhaps CCP needs to adapt to the modern market and stop trying to peddle a product that is quite niche.


EVE has survived and even flourished as a niche product for over a decade, and longer than most MMOs that have tried to adapt to the 'modern market'. The reason is because EVE is unique, isn't like anything in the 'modern market', and continues to appeal to a vast array of people that can appreciate that uniqueness.

Games that adapt to the 'modern market' are just like every other game on the modern market. Why do you want more of the same when we have something special and different as it is?

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

King Aires
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#4094 - 2016-01-19 14:50:02 UTC  |  Edited by: King Aires
baltec1 wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
So removed clone costs weren't a buff?


You warp the pod off, it cant die in highsec unless you chose to let it happen. Clone costs mean nothing.



King Aires wrote:

And the bowhead wasn't? Both of these things were mentioned too.


We use stations, we didn't even bother to use the orca.



Quoting the wrong person... don't attribute his posts to me please.

And buffs to ganking? How about the 700dps Catalyst, polarized weapons, Attack BC's, Artillery changes, blaster changes, slowing down barge/orca/frighter warp speeds, reducing the base hp of freighters and now SP injection for ready made day 1 BC gankers.

Yes CCP did some things to make it harder, they did some things to make it easier too. Today I see complete carebears doing it.

Again, doesn't matter. Baltec you are trying to tie two unrelated things together. Ganking and growth or contraction of server population. They are not complimentary or mutually exclusive systems my friend.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#4095 - 2016-01-19 14:52:45 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
That's not proof, that's you stating an opinion.
No thats proof. All of them were mechanical changes that have made EVE safer all of which are listed in Dev and patch logs. There is no debate about them.
No, but there is a debate over whether or not the game was more violent back then, which you continuously refuse to provide evidence about.

baltec1 wrote:
You warp the pod off, it cant die in highsec unless you chose to let it happen. Clone costs mean nothing.
Except of course the huge number of pods lost by gankers, especially in ganks with lots of players which causes enough lag to stop them getting away. Luckily you don;t need to do that anymore. No more trying to get away, no more flying back to your staging point, you can just float in space and wake up without SP loss or a big bill to pay.

baltec1 wrote:
We use stations, we didn't even bother to use the orca.
Sure... Gankers don't use the bowhead... Yeah, nice one, lol.

I'm not really surprised that you're one of these "but but but... it's not really a buff because..." people. When I played in highsec, I never got ganked, thus the changes to concord response times and concord tanking didn't affect me and therefore are not a buff to safety. In fact no changes have ever made me more safe than I made myself, so ganking has never been nerfed. That's as reasonable as your explanation for why ganking buffs aren't buffs.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#4096 - 2016-01-19 14:59:03 UTC
King Aires wrote:

And buffs to ganking? How about the 700dps Catalyst,


More expensive than the old brutix, battleships, thrasher etc that we used to use.

King Aires wrote:

polarized weapons,


How to make a gank ship worth more than the thing you are ganking.



King Aires wrote:

Attack BC's,


Vastly more expensive than the battleships we used to use


King Aires wrote:

Artillery changes, blaster changes


More than countered by the HP buffs



Irrelevant, warp speed means nothing.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#4097 - 2016-01-19 15:03:06 UTC
[quote=Lucas Kell]NNo, but there is a debate over whether or not the game was more violent back then, which you continuously refuse to provide evidence about.{quote]

So you honestly think EVE was not more violent when you could tank concord?

There is a reason why M0o are remembered after all of these years, perhaps its time for CCP to reverce all of these changes for a month so you can have a taste of what it was like back then.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#4098 - 2016-01-19 15:12:39 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
So you honestly think EVE was not more violent when you could tank concord?
Yes, I think that while some things have made ganking more challenging, there have been other changes that have made it more accessible and the amount of work that has gone into building organised ganking and improving ganking strategy means that more people go out and gank these days. It's a cheap, requires nearly no skills and delivers near-instant gratification.

baltec1 wrote:
There is a reason why M0o are remembered after all of these years, perhaps its time for CCP to reverce all of these changes for a month so you can have a taste of what it was like back then.
Probably because they were there early on to make a name for themselves. I've been about since 2005 so I've had a pretty good taste of the old days. Not quite M0o old, but old enough to see the majority of the changes you lot cry about.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#4099 - 2016-01-19 15:26:15 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Lucas Kell wrote:
Yes, I think that while some things have made ganking more challenging, there have been other changes that have made it more accessible and the amount of work that has gone into building organised ganking and improving ganking strategy means that more people go out and gank these days. It's a cheap, requires nearly no skills and delivers near-instant gratification.



OK prove it.

Go out and turn a profit ganking. Afterall if its super easy these days you should have no trouble.

Lucas Kell wrote:

Probably because they were there early on to make a name for themselves. I've been about since 2005 so I've had a pretty good taste of the old days. Not quite M0o old, but old enough to see the majority of the changes you lot cry about.


They are famous because they slaughtered everything in sight and are the only corp in history to have CCP step in and break up their gatecamps by scattering them to the far corners of EVE. Let that sink in, they killed so much CCP had to step in. And you honestly think today is just as violent? You have no idea how bad it could be back then. Fast forwards to 2011-2012. CFC groups managed to kill so many ice miners that they shut down all ice mining in highsec for a month, several times.

None of those things have happened for years now. The freighter ganking of today is nothing compared to what used to happen in the past. We don't even have hulkageddon anymore. The EVE of today is a much more boring place and if anything is responsible for the drop in numbers its that.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#4100 - 2016-01-19 15:33:35 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:


Games that adapt to the 'modern market' are just like every other game on the modern market. Why do you want more of the same when we have something special and different as it is?


That's a question that cannot be answered even by the people you are asking. They don't consciously realize that what they really want is the same experience across multiple games.

We've seen it in this thread when it comes to "industry standards", as well as how almost everyone arguing that EVE needs to radically change are people who have quit and come back, or scaled back on their eve accounts or talked about how some other game is more fun.

It all comes back to the fact that people don't really know what they want. They've proclaimed for years that EVE was on it's last leg, and CCP better wake up and change the game before it's too late. And off they went to Star Wars Galaxies, SWTOR, Black Prophecy, Star Trek Online, and not Elite and Star Citizen, and it will be the same with No Man's Sky if it sees the light of day.

But they will eventually end up right back here, because they think the want safety but those other games are too safe, they think they want dog fighting and more manual control but in reality to like being the captains of their own ships (and Commodores of their own multi-boxed Flotillas), they think they want an immersive experience but as they grow older they will learn they don't like that level of distraction any more.

And they think the want "more/better PVE" but will grow bored of even 'procedurally generated content because it will never be as dynaimc as human contact (this is why even though EVE has sleepers and drifters and incursion sanshas most people are still shooting at the stupid angel/guristas/blood raiders etc NPCs lol). They think they want to walk around and drink imaginary booze in an imaginary bar, but they do't because they don't play the games that already let you do that (like Star Trek Online).


etc etc. It's funny how people are still people even in a virtual world. What happens in this game is the same as I've seen it in real life, how people complain about the job we have and the boss we have and demand change. and then the old boss retires, a new boss comes in and does all the things the old boss didn't do, and the MAIN people who hate the new situation are...the people who complained loudest about the old boss.

If CCP changed this game to be what the radicals want it to be, not only would it not gain loads of new players, but those radicals would be the 1st to leave.