These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Every year, there are less users playing, why??

First post
Author
Kaivarian Coste
High Sec Express
#1821 - 2016-10-01 11:06:34 UTC
The barrer of re-entry to this game is probably too high. Players who enjoyed the game back in 2010 may not resub for $15 on a game they've already tried (and got bored of). You can buy some good indie titles on Steam for that much money.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1822 - 2016-10-01 17:26:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Kaivarian Coste wrote:
The barrer of re-entry to this game is probably too high. Players who enjoyed the game back in 2010 may not resub for $15 on a game they've already tried (and got bored of). You can buy some good indie titles on Steam for that much money.


Translation: CCP please make the game cheaper for me as I'm an entitled brat.

Seriously? Stop your whining. FYI, with inflation and a constant price CCP has been implicitly giving people discounts year over year. $15 today has less purchasing power than it did in 2010. $15 today would only buy you $13.87 worth of Stuff™ in 2010.

When I started playing, 2008, the annual sub cost was about $11 (if you pay for an entire year), that is now down to $9.83 in 2008 dollars. If you started in same year and are whining about subscription costs and PLEX prices...literally, STFU, STFD or GTFO. For under $10/month, in inflation adjusted dollars, you can play the game.

Edit: And I just looked, right now buying an entire year of Eve subscription is $8.33/month or $99. Nope, just double checked that is for upgrading from a trial account.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1823 - 2016-10-01 18:05:14 UTC
Arcelian wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Arcelian wrote:


This may be a contributing factor, I won't deny that. But I think it's hardly the only factor that caused the decline. Any lack of conflict is bad.

I don't think ganking caused a significant amount of players to quit either.....even though having been on the giving end of ganks myself,I know I have caused some players to never show up again. Or rather. shortly after the gank occured they never logged in again, I don't know if I caused it.

Ultimately I believe it boils down to the NPE, CCP has stated themselves that most people quit early on. Most of those probably never engaged in pvp at all. Maybe have Aura give new players a stack of 10 t1 frigates, and the tutorial gives a reward of 5 million isk for every one of those that gets blown up by another capsuleer? P


NPE could do with work but its not the primary problem. The issue is a lack of easily accessible content that used to exist but no longer does.


So what you are saying is the primary problem is that it's now harder to gank people. That is the primary cause of the loss of thousands of subs. Is that what you are saying?


Look...hmmm...

Okay, let me help you.

Lets try a thought experiment.

Suppose CCP, in their infinite wisdom (now stop laughing and go with it) decide to just simply ban ganking. They make CONCORD response times 1 second in every system, they buff the freighter EHP 100x, and also will permaban anyone still trying to or even succeeding at ganking. It is now gone for good.

Gankers lose content right? What do you think they are going to do? Start mining? Run missions? Probably not. Some might go back to HS after biomassing gank alts (after extracting any surplus SP), but some of them will likely leave.

Good you say? Well, let me bring in the ghost of Frederic Bastiat. Ever hear of him? No? Not surprised he died like 166 years ago. He pointed out that there are effects you can see (the seen) and those you can't see (the unseen). His parable that he is most known for is the broken window fallacy. The gist of the story is that a young lad breaks a shoe makers window, and the show maker hires a window repair man, and the typical response is: don't be too hard on the lad because he just created economic activity. But Bastiat said (paraphrasing here), "No, because that $5 or whatever to repair the window spent by the shoe maker can't be spent at the butchers, brewers or bakers businesses, and net wealth has not changed. Thus there is no net gain."

How does that apply here, well with not ganking there is no anti-ganking. The AG crowd also loses content.

In fact, we see that with Onictus posts where he describes how he lost content over time too but not in the obvious (the seen) way, but in the non-obvious way (the unseen).

You....you simply do not apprehend the unseen with respect to these nerfs. You are wearing blinders and your mind is closed. You are the last person CCP should ever listen too.

Oh, and if you want to dismiss Bastiat...go ahead. However, his parable of the broken window fallacy is the first known articulation of the concept known as opportunity cost. That concept people point to why "mining your own minerals to build stuff are not free".

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Kaivarian Coste
High Sec Express
#1824 - 2016-10-01 19:25:10 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:


Translation: CCP please make the game cheaper for me as I'm an entitled brat.


Um, screw you buddy. I'm subbed all the way to 2017, but there are other people out there who prefer to build a library of games, rather than remain subbed to a single game.
Arcelian
Nam Imperii
#1825 - 2016-10-01 22:13:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Arcelian
See below.
Arcelian
Nam Imperii
#1826 - 2016-10-01 22:38:48 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Arcelian wrote:

So what you are saying is the primary problem is that it's now harder to gank people. That is the primary cause of the loss of thousands of subs. Is that what you are saying?


What I am saying is that a lot of content has been removed. Ganking is just one of the affected areas, we have seen some activities entirely destroyed. Ninja salvaging, jetcan piracy and targeted wardecs are now best described as extinct. Your response is exactly what I was talking about, you don't understand that by continually nerfing ganking has had a negetive effect on the very miners you want to protect.

It used to be that miner ganking was focused on profitable targets, if you fitted a good tank on your hulk you would not be ganked. Now its a case of every hulk is a target to the one organisation left doing miner ganking because every miner is now unprofitable. So while miner ganks have collapsed in number the miners are infact less safe in a hulk because the gankers that are left no longer have a reason to target specific barges, they target anyone.

Then we also have the loss of jetcan mining and the pirates jetcan flipping. You no longer see miners willing to jump into a pvp ship to fight pirates because there is no need. You also don't see them making traps for these pirates anymore because, again, due to the changes there is no need for jetcans and thus, no pirates to trap.

And then we move onto the targeted wardecs, which thanks to the removal of the watch list are all but impossible, which means miners that get a war dec are far less likely to have to defend themselves if they move around in the outskirts of highsec.

Now you will probably be thinking "Great! Miners are less likely to be killed!" and you are right, they are far far less likely to be shot at as a miner in 2016 than in 2011. But, that also means as a miner you have a fraction of the content you used to have in 2011, a fraction of the challenges, a far more boring world to play in. The end result is more people quit not only because all of the nerfs to the people who think of themselves as PvP players but also the PvE players, simply because mining is a lot more boring and a lot less social today than 5 years ago.

And this is just a small part of the content we have lost.


Yes, making miner ganking profitable again would be a good change. I strongly agree with your other post a while back allowing exhumers to have more flexibility in fittings, allowing the player to decide how hard a nut that exhumer needs to be to crack.

I do agree that jetcan mining needs to be a thing again. I blame the mackinaw. I was really hoping with these recent changes they would return the hulk to the king of mining, that no other exhumer would even come close. I'm talking the hulk is at least a 40% better miner than the rest. And yes, now the hulk is better than the mack by a larger margin, but it's not nearly a large enough margin to make people use it and actually have to pay attention to the miner in the belt. Why CCP can't understand that I'll never know.

Let me make this clear: I don't give a flying **** about high sec miners. If CCP made all exhumers have an EHP of 500 tomorrow and drop a plex on destruiction, I'd rejoice in the fact that mineral prices are now going through the roof, and laugh all the way to the bank. 99% of all ganks to miners can be thwarted by simply BEING AT THE KEYS PAYING ATTENTION. I have no sympathy for the "I mine at work or while watching netflix" crowd. Some of those have been at the receiving end of my guns actually.

I don't disagree with you saying a lot of high sec content needs to come back to the game. I agree with pretty much every point you made. More content is never a bad thing, eve thrives on conflict. I just disagree that it's the primary cause of the loss of subs. The removal of ISboxers, banning of a lot of bot accounts, and the snoozefest since goons lost space in null I think is more the cause. The game was far more healthy when they held most of the power, I hope it returns that way.

That being said, I hope CCP is listening and implements what you suggest, I just don't believe it will have the effect you think it will.
Arcelian
Nam Imperii
#1827 - 2016-10-01 22:53:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Arcelian
Teckos Pech wrote:
Arcelian wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Arcelian wrote:


This may be a contributing factor, I won't deny that. But I think it's hardly the only factor that caused the decline. Any lack of conflict is bad.

I don't think ganking caused a significant amount of players to quit either.....even though having been on the giving end of ganks myself,I know I have caused some players to never show up again. Or rather. shortly after the gank occured they never logged in again, I don't know if I caused it.

Ultimately I believe it boils down to the NPE, CCP has stated themselves that most people quit early on. Most of those probably never engaged in pvp at all. Maybe have Aura give new players a stack of 10 t1 frigates, and the tutorial gives a reward of 5 million isk for every one of those that gets blown up by another capsuleer? P


NPE could do with work but its not the primary problem. The issue is a lack of easily accessible content that used to exist but no longer does.


So what you are saying is the primary problem is that it's now harder to gank people. That is the primary cause of the loss of thousands of subs. Is that what you are saying?


Look...hmmm...

Okay, let me help you.

Lets try a thought experiment.

Suppose CCP, in their infinite wisdom (now stop laughing and go with it) decide to just simply ban ganking. They make CONCORD response times 1 second in every system, they buff the freighter EHP 100x, and also will permaban anyone still trying to or even succeeding at ganking. It is now gone for good.

Gankers lose content right? What do you think they are going to do? Start mining? Run missions? Probably not. Some might go back to HS after biomassing gank alts (after extracting any surplus SP), but some of them will likely leave.

Good you say? Well, let me bring in the ghost of Frederic Bastiat. Ever hear of him? No? Not surprised he died like 166 years ago. He pointed out that there are effects you can see (the seen) and those you can't see (the unseen). His parable that he is most known for is the broken window fallacy. The gist of the story is that a young lad breaks a shoe makers window, and the show maker hires a window repair man, and the typical response is: don't be too hard on the lad because he just created economic activity. But Bastiat said (paraphrasing here), "No, because that $5 or whatever to repair the window spent by the shoe maker can't be spent at the butchers, brewers or bakers businesses, and net wealth has not changed. Thus there is no net gain."

How does that apply here, well with not ganking there is no anti-ganking. The AG crowd also loses content.

In fact, we see that with Onictus posts where he describes how he lost content over time too but not in the obvious (the seen) way, but in the non-obvious way (the unseen).

You....you simply do not apprehend the unseen with respect to these nerfs. You are wearing blinders and your mind is closed. You are the last person CCP should ever listen too.

Oh, and if you want to dismiss Bastiat...go ahead. However, his parable of the broken window fallacy is the first known articulation of the concept known as opportunity cost. That concept people point to why "mining your own minerals to build stuff are not free".


As I already stated, I don't care about ganking. Buff it to the end of time, doesn't really affect me. Yes, I understand the logic behind what you are saying.

Baltec put it well, and educated me on many ways how high sec pvp has been limited with nerfs and what not. I agree that in general these were bad moves. I just don't believe they are the root cause. With the exception of the watch list changes, that seriously cut the balls off of most high sec mercenaries. Unfortunately, CCP has already said "Sorry, our game, suck it up". Slightly paraphrasing there, but the same general idea.

Do I believe getting ganked causes some players to quit the game? Yes. Do I believe the lack of high sec content causes some to quit the game? Yes.

Do I think that either of these things have caused the loss of thousands of subs to EVE? Nope.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1828 - 2016-10-01 23:03:56 UTC
Arcelian wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Arcelian wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Arcelian wrote:


This may be a contributing factor, I won't deny that. But I think it's hardly the only factor that caused the decline. Any lack of conflict is bad.

I don't think ganking caused a significant amount of players to quit either.....even though having been on the giving end of ganks myself,I know I have caused some players to never show up again. Or rather. shortly after the gank occured they never logged in again, I don't know if I caused it.

Ultimately I believe it boils down to the NPE, CCP has stated themselves that most people quit early on. Most of those probably never engaged in pvp at all. Maybe have Aura give new players a stack of 10 t1 frigates, and the tutorial gives a reward of 5 million isk for every one of those that gets blown up by another capsuleer? P


NPE could do with work but its not the primary problem. The issue is a lack of easily accessible content that used to exist but no longer does.


So what you are saying is the primary problem is that it's now harder to gank people. That is the primary cause of the loss of thousands of subs. Is that what you are saying?


Look...hmmm...

Okay, let me help you.

Lets try a thought experiment.

Suppose CCP, in their infinite wisdom (now stop laughing and go with it) decide to just simply ban ganking. They make CONCORD response times 1 second in every system, they buff the freighter EHP 100x, and also will permaban anyone still trying to or even succeeding at ganking. It is now gone for good.

Gankers lose content right? What do you think they are going to do? Start mining? Run missions? Probably not. Some might go back to HS after biomassing gank alts (after extracting any surplus SP), but some of them will likely leave.

Good you say? Well, let me bring in the ghost of Frederic Bastiat. Ever hear of him? No? Not surprised he died like 166 years ago. He pointed out that there are effects you can see (the seen) and those you can't see (the unseen). His parable that he is most known for is the broken window fallacy. The gist of the story is that a young lad breaks a shoe makers window, and the show maker hires a window repair man, and the typical response is: don't be too hard on the lad because he just created economic activity. But Bastiat said (paraphrasing here), "No, because that $5 or whatever to repair the window spent by the shoe maker can't be spent at the butchers, brewers or bakers businesses, and net wealth has not changed. Thus there is no net gain."

How does that apply here, well with not ganking there is no anti-ganking. The AG crowd also loses content.

In fact, we see that with Onictus posts where he describes how he lost content over time too but not in the obvious (the seen) way, but in the non-obvious way (the unseen).

You....you simply do not apprehend the unseen with respect to these nerfs. You are wearing blinders and your mind is closed. You are the last person CCP should ever listen too.

Oh, and if you want to dismiss Bastiat...go ahead. However, his parable of the broken window fallacy is the first known articulation of the concept known as opportunity cost. That concept people point to why "mining your own minerals to build stuff are not free".


As I already stated, I don't care about ganking. Yes, I understand the logic behind what you are saying.

Baltec put it well, and educated me on many ways how high sec pvp has been limited with nerfs and what not. I agree that in general these were bad moves. I just don't believe they are the root cause. With the exception of the watch list changes, that seriously cut the balls off of most high sec mercenaries. Unfortunately, CCP has already said "Sorry, our game, suck it up". Slightly paraphrasing there, but the same general idea.

Do I believe getting ganked causes some players to quit the game? Yes. Do I believe the lack of high sec content causes some to quit the game? Yes.

Do I think that either of these things have caused the loss of thousands of subs to EVE? Nope.


Let me put it more simply then...

Removing content is bad for maintaining subs. EvE is a, at it's core, a PvP game. As such, removing any PvP content is likely to cause issues with maintaining let alone increasing subs.

And yes, CCP can say, "Sorry, our game, suck it up." But they are completely blinkered if they think that is our only option. Look at the number of subs that currently log in. We have the option of voting with out wallets. And look...looks like alot of people have vetoed the game with their wallets. CCP has been very adept at monetizing those who are left, but even that has a limit. The bottom line is that the trend is not looking good. Perhaps it is time to consider adding to HS PvP. HS is where people with limited amounts of time can log in and do stuff. Making it so there is less stuff to do and the stuff that remains is horribly boring...bad strategy.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1829 - 2016-10-01 23:52:24 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:

Lets try a thought experiment.

Suppose CCP, in their infinite wisdom (now stop laughing and go with it) decide to just simply ban ganking. They make CONCORD response times 1 second in every system, they buff the freighter EHP 100x, and also will permaban anyone still trying to or even succeeding at ganking. It is now gone for good.

Gankers lose content right? What do you think they are going to do? Start mining? Run missions? Probably not. Some might go back to HS after biomassing gank alts (after extracting any surplus SP), but some of them will likely leave.

... and now we can recall some people saying that 'most' or 'many of' gankers are alts of nullseccers. I don't remember who did say this but it is usually being said as answer to "code has no balls to fight ships with guns" as "LoL, these are alts of nullseccers who pvp's all day and night".

And having this in mind what will all these 'alts' do? Yeah. It really does not matter actually. Because all these mythical "nullseccers who pvps all day and night" will still do their stuff.

Yes, AG people could lose their content. But overall it does not look like big loss already is it?

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1830 - 2016-10-02 05:33:31 UTC
March rabbit wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:

Lets try a thought experiment.

Suppose CCP, in their infinite wisdom (now stop laughing and go with it) decide to just simply ban ganking. They make CONCORD response times 1 second in every system, they buff the freighter EHP 100x, and also will permaban anyone still trying to or even succeeding at ganking. It is now gone for good.

Gankers lose content right? What do you think they are going to do? Start mining? Run missions? Probably not. Some might go back to HS after biomassing gank alts (after extracting any surplus SP), but some of them will likely leave.

... and now we can recall some people saying that 'most' or 'many of' gankers are alts of nullseccers. I don't remember who did say this but it is usually being said as answer to "code has no balls to fight ships with guns" as "LoL, these are alts of nullseccers who pvp's all day and night".

And having this in mind what will all these 'alts' do? Yeah. It really does not matter actually. Because all these mythical "nullseccers who pvps all day and night" will still do their stuff.

Yes, AG people could lose their content. But overall it does not look like big loss already is it?


There you go again. Assuming Bravo Sierra. Since he is leaving (hopefully has left) are you after his crown as Chief Bad™?

I imagine that some gankers in HS are alts, some are mains. What is the break, no freaking idea. But undoubtedly some would leave with an additional round of nerfing. As has happened with previous rounds of nerfing.

Go back and look at the EvE Offline data. Look at when the war between Goons/the Imperium vs. IWI started. Logins started trending up. When Goons bailed and headed south...oh look the trend changed. It is now heading back up, but most likely that is seasonality.

Bottom line: IMO PvP is what drives logins. Having been in NS/LS for almost 8 years I can tell you that when we have a war, or PvP on a regular basis people log in. When we don't they don't.

So don't be so glib dismissing the removal of ganking. I don't think you completely understand the situation...you are too narrow minded.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1831 - 2016-10-02 08:59:15 UTC  |  Edited by: March rabbit
Teckos Pech wrote:
March rabbit wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:

Lets try a thought experiment.

Suppose CCP, in their infinite wisdom (now stop laughing and go with it) decide to just simply ban ganking. They make CONCORD response times 1 second in every system, they buff the freighter EHP 100x, and also will permaban anyone still trying to or even succeeding at ganking. It is now gone for good.

Gankers lose content right? What do you think they are going to do? Start mining? Run missions? Probably not. Some might go back to HS after biomassing gank alts (after extracting any surplus SP), but some of them will likely leave.

... and now we can recall some people saying that 'most' or 'many of' gankers are alts of nullseccers. I don't remember who did say this but it is usually being said as answer to "code has no balls to fight ships with guns" as "LoL, these are alts of nullseccers who pvp's all day and night".

And having this in mind what will all these 'alts' do? Yeah. It really does not matter actually. Because all these mythical "nullseccers who pvps all day and night" will still do their stuff.

Yes, AG people could lose their content. But overall it does not look like big loss already is it?


I imagine that some gankers in HS are alts, some are mains. What is the break, no freaking idea. But undoubtedly some would leave with an additional round of nerfing. As has happened with previous rounds of nerfing.

Yes, like some others left when died afk lvl4 farming, when multiboxing was nerfed. Some will leave in November when OGB will be removed (my alt already sold all SP from leadership in preparation to this event). I can imagine every nerf (or like some like to call it 'need to adapt again') leads to some people leaving the game.

Teckos Pech wrote:

Go back and look at the EvE Offline data. Look at when the war between Goons/the Imperium vs. IWI started. Logins started trending up. When Goons bailed and headed south...oh look the trend changed. It is now heading back up, but most likely that is seasonality.

Bottom line: IMO PvP is what drives logins. Having been in NS/LS for almost 8 years I can tell you that when we have a war, or PvP on a regular basis people log in. When we don't they don't.

It's very known fact. Hype when big 0.0 sec war or huge battle always leads to people resubscribe or new people come. When it stops - many leave again.
I resubscribed to take part in Casino War too. But was like 2 months late and didn't see anything interestingBig smile But yeah, i have returned from year of vacation.

Teckos Pech wrote:

So don't be so glib dismissing the removal of ganking. I don't think you completely understand the situation...you are too narrow minded.

You have drawn a picture when gankers are mains and nerfing ganking will lead to many quits.
I have pointed that some people (need to say from pro-ganking team) say that ganking characters are mainly second alts of "real players". This makes "many quits" very unbelievable. At least it would be closer to multiboxer nerfs when people close their auxiliary alts.

So yea.... "narrow minded" Big smile

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"

Drago Shouna
Doomheim
#1832 - 2016-10-02 11:04:21 UTC
[

This may be a contributing factor, I won't deny that. But I think it's hardly the only factor that caused the decline. Any lack of conflict is bad.

I don't think ganking caused a significant amount of players to quit either.....even though having been on the giving end of ganks myself,I know I have caused some players to never show up again. Or rather. shortly after the gank occured they never logged in again, I don't know if I caused it.

Ultimately I believe it boils down to the NPE, CCP has stated themselves that most people quit early on. Most of those probably never engaged in pvp at all. Maybe have Aura give new players a stack of 10 t1 frigates, and the tutorial gives a reward of 5 million isk for every one of those that gets blown up by another capsuleer? P[/quote]

NPE could do with work but its not the primary problem. The issue is a lack of easily accessible content that used to exist but no longer does.[/quote]

So what you are saying is the primary problem is that it's now harder to gank people. That is the primary cause of the loss of thousands of subs. Is that what you are saying?[/quote]

Look...hmmm...

Okay, let me help you.

Lets try a thought experiment.

Suppose CCP, in their infinite wisdom (now stop laughing and go with it) decide to just simply ban ganking. They make CONCORD response times 1 second in every system, they buff the freighter EHP 100x, and also will permaban anyone still trying to or even succeeding at ganking. It is now gone for good.

Gankers lose content right? What do you think they are going to do? Start mining? Run missions? Probably not. Some might go back to HS after biomassing gank alts (after extracting any surplus SP), but some of them will likely leave.

Good you say? Well, let me bring in the ghost of Frederic Bastiat. Ever hear of him? No? Not surprised he died like 166 years ago. He pointed out that there are effects you can see (the seen) and those you can't see (the unseen). His parable that he is most known for is the broken window fallacy. The gist of the story is that a young lad breaks a shoe makers window, and the show maker hires a window repair man, and the typical response is: don't be too hard on the lad because he just created economic activity. But Bastiat said (paraphrasing here), "No, because that $5 or whatever to repair the window spent by the shoe maker can't be spent at the butchers, brewers or bakers businesses, and net wealth has not changed. Thus there is no net gain."

How does that apply here, well with not ganking there is no anti-ganking. The AG crowd also loses content.

In fact, we see that with Onictus posts where he describes how he lost content over time too but not in the obvious (the seen) way, but in the non-obvious way (the unseen).

You....you simply do not apprehend the unseen with respect to these nerfs. You are wearing blinders and your mind is closed. You are the last person CCP should ever listen too.

Oh, and if you want to dismiss Bastiat...go ahead. However, his parable of the broken window fallacy is the first known articulation of the concept known as opportunity cost. That concept people point to why "mining your own minerals to build stuff are not free".[/quote]

As I already stated, I don't care about ganking. Yes, I understand the logic behind what you are saying.

Baltec put it well, and educated me on many ways how high sec pvp has been limited with nerfs and what not. I agree that in general these were bad moves. I just don't believe they are the root cause. With the exception of the watch list changes, that seriously cut the balls off of most high sec mercenaries. Unfortunately, CCP has already said "Sorry, our game, suck it up". Slightly paraphrasing there, but the same general idea.

Do I believe getting ganked causes some players to quit the game? Yes. Do I believe the lack of high sec content causes some to quit the game? Yes.

Do I think that either of these things have caused the loss of thousands of subs to EVE? Nope.
[/quote]

Let me put it more simply then...

Removing content is bad for maintaining subs. EvE is a, at it's core, a PvP game. As such, removing any PvP content is likely to cause issues with maintaining let alone increasing subs.

And yes, CCP can say, "Sorry, our game, suck it up." But they are completely blinkered if they think that is our only option. Look at the number of subs that currently log in. We have the option of voting with out wallets. And look...looks like alot of people have vetoed the game with their wallets. CCP has been very adept at monetizing those who are left, but even that has a limit. The bottom line is that the trend is not looking good. Perhaps it is time to consider adding to HS PvP. HS is where people with limited amounts of time can log in and do stuff. Making it so there is less stuff to do and the stuff that remains is horribly boring...bad strategy.[/quote]



Rubbish, you're just after easy kills..

Any player now can log in for 15 mins and find as much pvp as he/she wants in Provi and other places..The only ones screaming for more HS pvp are the ones who can't face players perfectly willing and able to shoot back.

As for HS, again, there's as much as you can handle, go wardec Marmite or the other big merc corps..you'll get as many fights as you want.

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.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1833 - 2016-10-02 11:14:51 UTC
Drago Shouna wrote:



Rubbish, you're just after easy kills..

Any player now can log in for 15 mins and find as much pvp as he/she wants in Provi and other places..The only ones screaming for more HS pvp are the ones who can't face players perfectly willing and able to shoot back.


Try again.
Drago Shouna
Doomheim
#1834 - 2016-10-02 11:17:31 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Drago Shouna wrote:



Rubbish, you're just after easy kills..

Any player now can log in for 15 mins and find as much pvp as he/she wants in Provi and other places..The only ones screaming for more HS pvp are the ones who can't face players perfectly willing and able to shoot back.


Try again.



I have no need to.

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.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1835 - 2016-10-02 11:22:54 UTC
Drago Shouna wrote:



I have no need to.


Drago Shouna wrote:

The only ones screaming for more HS pvp are the ones who can't face players perfectly willing and able to shoot back.


Oh I think you do.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1836 - 2016-10-02 19:25:16 UTC
Drago Shouna wrote:


Rubbish, you're just after easy kills..

Any player now can log in for 15 mins and find as much pvp as he/she wants in Provi and other places..The only ones screaming for more HS pvp are the ones who can't face players perfectly willing and able to shoot back.

As for HS, again, there's as much as you can handle, go wardec Marmite or the other big merc corps..you'll get as many fights as you want.


And there it is, the attempt to down play PvP as not the "right kind" of PvP or not the "honorable" type of PvP. The old, "I don't mind if CCP removes PvP I disapprove of," type of mentality.

In short another narrow minded blowhard with an agenda.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Sitting Bull Lakota
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
#1837 - 2016-10-03 11:11:56 UTC
Well, I've wardec'd Marmite (indirectly). Let's see if Drago's theory can hold water.
It's only been a day, but it's looking like Drago's "dec Marmite" shtick won't deliver.
And why should it? Tora's running a business. If his members are just sitting around in station waiting for any random wartarget to ring the service bell, then he's losing money. All those contacts he's running need people to work them.

Marmite is too busy to just hang around waiting to give content to every random passerby.
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1838 - 2016-10-03 15:47:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Shae Tadaruwa
**** me. Wrong thread. I'm an idiot.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."

ISD Max Trix
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#1839 - 2016-10-03 16:32:28 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Max Trix
Well this thread had a great run. Thanks for your input, you gave us a lot to think about.
Closed.

ISD Max Trix

Lieutenant

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

I do not respond to EVE mails about forum moderation.