EVE General Discussion

You say that like it's something virtuous to refuse to change your mind under any circumstances, when in fact, this is actually your problem. Your refusal to acknowledge or consider ideas that oppose your own are why you'll never learn anything new, and why you'll only end up limiting your ability to expand your intellect.

Anyone can be wrong. Whether or not you agree with me is completely irrelevant to whether or not I'm right. If you can't accept that, then why are you accusing anyone of using SJW tactics?

I'm never going to give up countering misinformation or that bullshit you were swinging earlier about **** being on the same level of trauma as losing pixel spaceships. Never. It's not a waste of time at all, because other people aren't just like you mate. There are lots of people out there that are open to reason, open to being wrong and learning new things, and love alternate points of view from the ones they're fed by the single-minded (dare I say religious) thought processes that you're practicing.

The other fun thing about you is that, while you're running around accusing other people of being SJW, you sit there and say things like "people like you" as if we're some kind of collective. There are no people like me, mate. There's just me.

Tumblr called, Herzog. They want their cringe back.

Yes, of course I can provide the sources.

It's not like they haven't been talked to death over the last couple of years.

Baltect posted some above, but I'll go get them and post them for you as you are either too lazy or too incompetent to also keep abreast of what has been presented.

I'll edit them back into this post.

Edit 1:

CCP Rise FanFest 2015: Using Science to Help Newbros

That focuses mainly on new players in the period before they have subscribed.

Edit 2:

CCP Rise Fanfest 2014: NPE Vision

This focuses on players that have subbed. Covers 'rich experiences' which includes activities aside from pvp, which is great.

Edit 3:

Quote from CCP Rise in the NPE Thread on this forum

More links as I find them.

The situation isn't complex, its the fix that is the complicated bit. Its no coincidence that as the game has become safer the rate of growth has fallen. This does not mean we should remove concord but it does mean changes are going to have to be made to your level of CCP protection. For example, with the upcomming barge changes we should demand that CCP remove the pre fitting mantra they have and give us the options to do it for ourselves.

It's a good thing feelings don't define reality then.

What you're seeing here is data that wholly supports at least one definitive conclusion - that PVP and ganking are not driving new players away like so many claim on the forums. More people are leaving if they AREN'T experiencing PVP early, which means the data also supports a fair hypothesis that new players who are engaged or introduced to PVP early on are more likely to stick around, although the data alone does not definitively prove this. I can say I agree with this conclusion based on my experience of training a fair few new players myself for PVP.

You know what the difference is between your presumption and CCP's analysis? Presumption.

You and I can presume whatever we like, but unless either of us have data to measure against, our presumptions are absolutely no value. They certainly can't be used to argue against data that is on the table. To do so is idiotic.

Of course, nowhere did I claim causation, however correlation is still a very powerful decision making tool in business; and correlation rarely exists without some causation as well (there are notable exceptions to that).

Actually, there is a rather good recent article that mirrors my view on that issue:

https://medium.freecodecamp.com/if-correlation-doesnt-imply-causation-then-what-does-c74f20d26438#.l0iygab6k
As for the rest of it, it's been talked to death for ages. Don't read more into my statement above than what I wrote. It's not magic at all. CCP have put evidence out over the last couple of years demonstrating a correlation between being blown up and staying longer. The evidence is there (and still being posted above).

Of course, idiots will still say it's all bollocks, because it doesn't fit their bias. But that's what idiots do. Ignore inconvenient facts.

So you are saying CCP are lying?

I was talking about his (and not only his) dogmatic stance. You seem to be genuinly convinced that ganking in first 14 days have good results on player staying with the game.

When this is only 1 percent of the whole that was ganked in this 14 days. It is very poor sample. What about the rest 99 percent that could have been ganked after that time? Where are statistics about that?

Else: how do you search for more meningfull data?

And: what players write when they resign can only be a peak of the iceberg.

My 2 cents.

- NPC Corps need some rework

- Getting new player into good corps needs to be worked on.

- Wardecs need to be drastically limited, maybe to 3 per alliance.

Most newbros start in Highsec, not that many start the game with the intention to immeditely join a specific Nullsec/Lowsec newbro alliance. They wander around, make the opportunities and carrier agents and slowly start to get a grip of the game.

Inevitably they will want to join a corp to do somethig specific like mining, mission running, etc... Now there is the problem: There are many corps out there and a fair number is just plain bad, really really bad. A new member has of course no way to tell this. Now there are 3 possible ways how this can go. First is they are some time in this corp when they realize this is a bad one and they need to find another. Second is they get a wrong picture of eve due to the corp and leave the game. Third (which is unfortunately the most likely) they land in a corp (which doesn´t necessarily need to be a bad one) which is wardecced. Now they possibly get killed over and over by one or multiple corps and are in many cases not able to recieve good info on how to counter it or work with the tips they got. They decide "f*** this game" and go.

Well, possibility 3 is to a degree conterable: Drastically limit wardecs so 1 ally/corp cannot have more then 100 allies/corps wardecced like it is today.
Next that needs work is sorting out bad newbro corps. Generally achieved when advertising good ones and imo ccp should find a way to achieve this via ingame mechanics although i haveno clue how to do this. Maybe rework the newbie friendly tag so it is only markable when you do some certain things.

Last but not least: Guide them. I wonder how many of those who debatte here have just sat down one day in Arnon on the SOE station undock and convo`d newbros. I did and when i started the game someone there also convo'd me and gave me some general tips. And today i still remember when my wallet flashed once after undocking and i saw someone sending me a few million ISK. Upon asking he told me he just robbed a large alliance and wants to spread some of the ISK to newbros. All this 3 years ago. This game is remarkable and the people in it also. We cannot do something about making the game more remarkable but we certainly can do something to make the players remarkable.

1 and 2 I completely agree with, however if 2 happens, 3 is not required.

Corps/Alliances like Eve-Uni, Horde, Brave, etc. that are very new player friendly, operate under permanent wardec and still manage to have thriving newbros.

That's because they actively help their new players and understand how to avoid any issues from wardecs. They have good CEOs and good leadership.

Good Corps are never threatened by wardecs and view them in some cases, as a great way to teach their new players.

So the positive side of the second suggestion means you don't need that third one at all. More limitations in the mechanics are not required. Tools to find the good corps are.