These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Recurring Opportunities coming soon

First post
Author
Ria Nieyli
Nieyli Enterprises
SL33PERS
#1761 - 2016-04-16 11:10:59 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
lol that's the problem no one or at least not enough will leave and ccp know this


Really? Why do you think there has been a decline in the recent years then?
Drago Shouna
Doomheim
#1762 - 2016-04-16 11:22:27 UTC
Ria Nieyli wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
lol that's the problem no one or at least not enough will leave and ccp know this


Really? Why do you think there has been a decline in the recent years then?


Well it had nothing to do with sp injectors or dailies as they are new.

Solecist Project...." They refuse to play by the rules and laws of the game and use it as excuse ..." " They don't care about how you play as long as they get to play how they want."

Welcome to EVE.

Lugh Crow-Slave
#1763 - 2016-04-16 11:23:42 UTC
Ria Nieyli wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
lol that's the problem no one or at least not enough will leave and ccp know this


Really? Why do you think there has been a decline in the recent years then?


oh no thats long term ccp doesn't care about that it seems its all about the short term with them

they keep brinign things in that may cause things to spike but they dont hold players and they drive a few old ones a way

so they see membership go up but then drop farther than it was

so they decide they need something else that will spike it rather than fixing underling issues
Ria Nieyli
Nieyli Enterprises
SL33PERS
#1764 - 2016-04-16 11:24:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Ria Nieyli
Drago Shouna wrote:
Well it had nothing to do with sp injectors or dailies as they are new.


But those two things are just the latest in the line of unpopular changes that CCP has introduced.
Drago Shouna
Doomheim
#1765 - 2016-04-16 11:34:08 UTC
I don't like the way rigs are going to work on a Medium Citadel, particularly Reprocessing.

Mainly the answers I got in that thread was to htfu or gtfo, guess what?

I presume you get what I mean?

Solecist Project...." They refuse to play by the rules and laws of the game and use it as excuse ..." " They don't care about how you play as long as they get to play how they want."

Welcome to EVE.

sero Hita
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1766 - 2016-04-16 11:50:46 UTC
Ria Nieyli wrote:


Lacking common decency? CCP Rise basically told the playerbase that CCP thinks they're ******** and you're accusing people of lacking common decency?
What is wrong with you? CCP said we introduce feature X. They did not basically tell anyone that they are ********. This is all you. The decency part was about people not being able to communicate without spewing venom. thank you for proving my point. You misunderstand my post, you explode like this is some serious matter. It is just a bonus for logging in and killing a rat. calm down. I have said plenty of times that I don't think this feature does what they want, but it is also pretty harmless.

Ria Nieyli wrote:

Here:

CCP Rise wrote:
We are taking your feedback seriously and if we don't make any changes before release we will absolutely be following up shortly after release with changes based on feedback and behavior.


If you think that people will accept this as sound reasoning for introducing the feature, it must mean that you think they're stupid.

This is not a reasoning for the feature... how can you read it as such???????? It is their plan for how they respond to the feedback. And apparantly their plan is :Wait and see, which is to be honest a quite normal approach for implementing features.

"I'm all for pvp, don't get me wrong. I've ganked in Empire, blobed in low sec. Got T-shirts from every which-where.. But to be forced into a pvp confrontation that I didn't want is wrong ccp." RealFlisker

Ria Nieyli
Nieyli Enterprises
SL33PERS
#1767 - 2016-04-16 11:53:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Ria Nieyli
Drago Shouna wrote:
I don't like the way rigs are going to work on a Medium Citadel, particularly Reprocessing.

Mainly the answers I got in that thread was to htfu or gtfo, guess what?

I presume you get what I mean?


Yes, I know all the edgy eve memes too. You're adorable.

sero Hita wrote:
This is not a reasoning for the feature... how can you read it as such???????? It is their plan for how they respond to the feedback. And apparantly their plan is :Wait and see, which is to be honest a quite normal approach for implementing features.


The feature is going to have good user participation numbers, because not engaging it is going to be too costly. Feedback is being outright disregarded, and the promised changes - well, there aren't going to be any. It's just a publicity piece, created to appease the playerbase and seem reasonable, while completely disregarding them. It's downright insulting. At this point it doesn't even matter what the change is.
sero Hita
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1768 - 2016-04-16 12:02:29 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Ria Nieyli wrote:
sero Hita wrote:
I would just love being able to spend my lunch breaks on these forums, reading funny posts about the game i enjoy. Without getting my energy sucked out of me, from people overrection and lacking common decency.


Lacking common decency? CCP Rise basically told the playerbase that CCP thinks they're ******** and you're accusing people of lacking common decency?


well idk about that but he does seem to think that we should be on eve during lunch breaks... you know because we can all do that

Where did I write that you should be able to be on EVE (whatever that means) in your lunchbreak, or that everyone can? That was why I used "I". To implicate that the mentioned only apply to me personally.

"I'm all for pvp, don't get me wrong. I've ganked in Empire, blobed in low sec. Got T-shirts from every which-where.. But to be forced into a pvp confrontation that I didn't want is wrong ccp." RealFlisker

Lugh Crow-Slave
#1769 - 2016-04-16 12:24:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
sero Hita wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Ria Nieyli wrote:
sero Hita wrote:
I would just love being able to spend my lunch breaks on these forums, reading funny posts about the game i enjoy. Without getting my energy sucked out of me, from people overrection and lacking common decency.


Lacking common decency? CCP Rise basically told the playerbase that CCP thinks they're ******** and you're accusing people of lacking common decency?


well idk about that but he does seem to think that we should be on eve during lunch breaks... you know because we can all do that

Where did I write that you should be able to be on EVE (whatever that means) in your lunchbreak, or that everyone can? That was why I used "I". To implicate that the mentioned only apply to me personally.


You didn't, Rise did. Keep up now
Lugh Crow-Slave
#1770 - 2016-04-16 12:25:59 UTC
Drago Shouna wrote:
I don't like the way rigs are going to work on a Medium Citadel, particularly Reprocessing.

Mainly the answers I got in that thread was to htfu or gtfo, guess what?

I presume you get what I mean?



HTFU had nothing to do with disagreeing with a fundamental shift in the games philosophy
sero Hita
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1771 - 2016-04-16 12:28:34 UTC
Ria Nieyli wrote:
Drago Shouna wrote:
I don't like the way rigs are going to work on a Medium Citadel, particularly Reprocessing.

Mainly the answers I got in that thread was to htfu or gtfo, guess what?

I presume you get what I mean?


Yes, I know all the edgy eve memes too. You're adorable.

sero Hita wrote:
This is not a reasoning for the feature... how can you read it as such???????? It is their plan for how they respond to the feedback. And apparantly their plan is :Wait and see, which is to be honest a quite normal approach for implementing features.


The feature is going to have good user participation numbers, because not engaging it is going to be too costly. Feedback is being outright disregarded, and the promised changes - well, there aren't going to be any. It's just a publicity piece, created to appease the playerbase and seem reasonable, while completely disregarding them. It's downright insulting. At this point it doesn't even matter what the change is.


i understand your point. But feedback was somewhat regarded, it was changed to being accountwise instead of characterwise. The thing is the only feedback you think they should listen to is "cancel the changes". They are not gonna do that. I am also not sure, I think the community needs to be asked about every change or that it is insulting they are not. It is their game afterall.

"I'm all for pvp, don't get me wrong. I've ganked in Empire, blobed in low sec. Got T-shirts from every which-where.. But to be forced into a pvp confrontation that I didn't want is wrong ccp." RealFlisker

Ria Nieyli
Nieyli Enterprises
SL33PERS
#1772 - 2016-04-16 12:30:59 UTC
That's not what I said. Go shill somewhere else.
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#1773 - 2016-04-16 12:42:12 UTC
Ria Nieyli wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
i'm right there with you but ccp is going to implement them. Period.


And then people will leave. It's just how it works when you alter the product away from what your core userbase likes in it.
The **** part is that we supposedly have CSM to help with stuff like that, but it doesn't matter.


Get down from that PvP horse, you're being silly now. Roll

The core user base of EVE are carebears. The core user base of EVE are PvErs. The core user base of EVE are highseccers.

That's where the money comes from for CCP.
Axhind
Eternity INC.
Goonswarm Federation
#1774 - 2016-04-16 12:51:34 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Ria Nieyli wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
i'm right there with you but ccp is going to implement them. Period.


And then people will leave. It's just how it works when you alter the product from what your core userbase likes in it.


lol that's the problem no one or at least not enough will leave and ccp know this

they will turn the heat up slow making sure not to many jump out of the pot



Problem with this kind of behaviour is that at some point you cross a threshold and suddenly everyone is gone and there is **** all you can do about it. This has been seen in everything from biological systems (overfishing) to taxes on tobacco or alcohol. CCPs greatest asset are its players as they are the ones creating all the narrative that brings in the new players. Once they are gone it's game over forever.
Axhind
Eternity INC.
Goonswarm Federation
#1775 - 2016-04-16 12:56:54 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Ria Nieyli wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
i'm right there with you but ccp is going to implement them. Period.


And then people will leave. It's just how it works when you alter the product away from what your core userbase likes in it.
The **** part is that we supposedly have CSM to help with stuff like that, but it doesn't matter.


Get down from that PvP horse, you're being silly now. Roll

The core user base of EVE are carebears. The core user base of EVE are PvErs. The core user base of EVE are highseccers.

That's where the money comes from for CCP.


If that's the case how come numbers are so much down after changes to jump ranges of capitals (not used in high sec) and fozzie sov? CCP changes 0.0 where tiny minority of players hang out, according to you, and numbers drop like a rock.

Might be something wrong with your and CCPs interpretation of data. There are a lot of characters in high sec but almost everyone in 0.0 has alts in high sec. At least a Jita shopping one but probably several for missions/incursion/logistics/whatever.

You can't **** on 0.0 all the time and expect that not to have any impact on the numbers. Not to mention what was the last time you heard a newbie tell how we came to eve to experience the awesome PvE in high sec as compared to hearing about huge 0.0 battlers/politics/drama?
Erania Amandine
Dark Matters and Energies
#1776 - 2016-04-16 13:03:08 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Now, with before and after data we can see that making it into the client is a huge step towards real activity, even if the reason for logging in in the first place seems artificial. So this leads us to where we are now, attempting to find ways to create more logins that also don't feel like such a punishment as the skill queue limitations did. This may not turn out to be the perfect alternative but that's what we're looking for.


While seeing the rationale in this 'more log-ins yield (some measure of) more content!', I still don't like the idea.
The mechanic is to compel the player to log-in his characters to get rewards. The moment the player starts to feel compelled to do something is the moment he gets bored, and the moment he gets bored is the moment he's thinking to quit. I've seen this happen to me while trying to efficiently run PI on a few characters, I was very close to quitting EVE altogether.
That taught me to stay away from the 'I must do these things every day' mentality, and to look around for what I have fun doing, which is rarely the same thing every day.
So, first and foremost, i.m.o. CCP should aim to avoid introducing potentially boring mechanics (and correct those in place now, like PI!).
Also, it is the long term effect of the mechanic that should be considered not the first few days, unless it is available for a limited time as events like the recent Gurista one.
In this perspective, the very idea of creating 'artificial log-ins' by compelling players into repetitive routines starts on the wrong foot.
The aim should rather be to expand on the fun part of game, and have more real, rather than artificial, log-ins.

Fly safe o7
Lugh Crow-Slave
#1777 - 2016-04-16 13:07:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Ria Nieyli wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
i'm right there with you but ccp is going to implement them. Period.


And then people will leave. It's just how it works when you alter the product away from what your core userbase likes in it.
The **** part is that we supposedly have CSM to help with stuff like that, but it doesn't matter.


Get down from that PvP horse, you're being silly now. Roll

The core user base of EVE are carebears. The core user base of EVE are PvErs. The core user base of EVE are highseccers.

That's where the money comes from for CCP.


What does this have to do with pvp or pve

It could be kill a player get 10k SP and it would still be a bad idea.

What the core user base tends to like is what the marketing shows.

And for eve that is a free player built sandbox dailies ate a contradiction to the idea of a sandbox
Udonor
Doomheim
#1778 - 2016-04-16 14:45:53 UTC
IMHO TDLR thread. So I am probably voting rather than being original.

SP is a good prize if you are making guarantees. But how many SP depends on your real goals.

For what I think CCP is proposing the reward should only be 1K-4K SP.

Getting people to log in for 3-5 minutes is easy. Getting them to do some very short game play of less than 10 minutes is not much harder. Either way some might stay logged on AFK. But AFK don't usually get further involved.




#1 I realize the simple login goal is necessary but this smells of running up login stats for external investors as real immediate purpose.

#2 I also know all of us including CCP do have concerns about numbers of truly involved players.


Udonor
Doomheim
#1779 - 2016-04-16 15:39:57 UTC
Udonor wrote:
IMHO TDLR thread. So I am probably voting rather than being original.

SP is a good prize if you are making guarantees. But how many SP depends on your real goals.

For what I think CCP is proposing the reward should only be 1K-4K SP.

Getting people to log in for 3-5 minutes is easy. Getting them to do some very short game play of less than 10 minutes is not much harder. Either way some might stay logged on AFK. But AFK don't usually get further involved.




#1 I realize the simple login goal is necessary but this smells of running up login stats for external investors as real immediate purpose.

#2 I also know all of us including CCP do have concerns about numbers of truly involved players.





If we really want #2 to increase chances of people getting involved...

(a) first provide the small zero effort guaranteed reward to get them logged on for a few minutes. I suggest 2-3 hour SP boost (2K?) for something like retrieve package at beacon in-system.

(b) Provide some ESCALATION to greater/additional reward maybe up to that extra 8K SP for additional daily task..

(b1) maybe issue a courier contract for SP to be delivered to another online player.

(b2) consider anything where contact with 1 other online player is required. Maybe structure a new relay type of courier contract where a final delivery reward to all involved individuals increases for the more systems and people are involved within time limits (rationale = for spy work or black market).



Also consider 2nd extra reward as random value and type rather than guaranteed fixed result.
(a) Random type of reward would keep from impacting any specific market segment and causing collapse.
(b) Random value appeals to the gambler instinct with possibility of greater reward but average of rewards collected would not inflate SP or market.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#1780 - 2016-04-16 15:58:01 UTC
Udonor wrote:
Udonor wrote:
IMHO TDLR thread. So I am probably voting rather than being original.

SP is a good prize if you are making guarantees. But how many SP depends on your real goals.

For what I think CCP is proposing the reward should only be 1K-4K SP.

Getting people to log in for 3-5 minutes is easy. Getting them to do some very short game play of less than 10 minutes is not much harder. Either way some might stay logged on AFK. But AFK don't usually get further involved.




#1 I realize the simple login goal is necessary but this smells of running up login stats for external investors as real immediate purpose.

#2 I also know all of us including CCP do have concerns about numbers of truly involved players.





If we really want #2 to increase chances of people getting involved...

(a) first provide the small zero effort guaranteed reward to get them logged on for a few minutes. I suggest 2-3 hour SP boost (2K?) for something like retrieve package at beacon in-system.

(b) Provide some ESCALATION to greater/additional reward maybe up to that extra 8K SP for additional daily task..

(b1) maybe issue a courier contract for SP to be delivered to another online player.

(b2) consider anything where contact with 1 other online player is required. Maybe structure a new relay type of courier contract where a final delivery reward to all involved individuals increases for the more systems and people are involved within time limits (rationale = for spy work or black market).



Also consider 2nd extra reward as random value and type rather than guaranteed fixed result.
(a) Random type of reward would keep from impacting any specific market segment and causing collapse.
(b) Random value appeals to the gambler instinct with possibility of greater reward but average of rewards collected would not inflate SP or market.


So I need to put my game and personal goals on hold even longer?

Better idea use game mechanics to make players want to log in because they enjoy it not because they feel compelled to do it