EVE General Discussion

There is a chat channel for every fleet available when you join one. It automatically opens when you accept a fleet invitation. The messages you type in fleet chat are also relayed to the server (so they can be sent to everyone else too).

CCP clearly are able to track who types in fleet chat (to what extent they do, we don't know).

Why is the data flawed?

Where for example is this wrong, for subscribed players:

10% stick with the game long term
40% move into solo/mission play out of the NPE and many leave
50% leave within a month or so

Also the data from this year, looking at 80,000 unique new players (not alts), how is that not valid in the context that it was presented?

That's because you misunderstand this. When I say 50% stick with the game, I mean for long enough to show an interet in it. The first 50% leave, those players I would consider to be unreachable, they are players with no interst in the game. The other 50% stay in the game for an indeterminate amount of time. He states than of that last 50%, one fifth goes to social play and most of those tend to stay. He also states that the other four fifths move into classic themepark and that many of them leave. We know not all of them leave, because we see them in game. That four fifths obviously have some interest in the game or they would leave right away, so take what they are interested in and make it more soical and more diverse. That's what I'm saying. If you can't hold a reasonable conversation about that, then that if your failing.

And yes, people take those stats as provided by Rise and they claim that to mean that players who don't leap into ganking or players who support PvE playstyles are bad for the game. You only have to read Kaarous' posts to see countless examples of that, but there are many others who have claimed exactly the same.

Have you used the NPE? All it does it give you pop up achievements whenever you do stuff and yet another list of things you may want to do. It's not a rich experience in itself and still requires a player to find their own content, and that's the problem, they don't.

No, but there's a clear idea of what type of gameplay people are looking for when they stumble into solo gameplay. They are looking for classic "level my raven" gameplay. Adding a bunch of achievements for rotating your camera and locking an asteroid won't suddenly make people social, and neither will adding content dominated by veteran players like NPC battleships that can oneshot capitals. IMHO changing the themepark PVE so it in itself leads to a diverse and social experience would be a far better way to steer people who are looking for that when they arrive.

Multiple accounts can be in the same fleet. How does CCP know they are 80,000 unique new players?
Sub /= new player
new character /= new player
TS3/mumble are more used by alliances than fleet chat.

Go look at the presentation from this years FanFest by CCP Rise. He states that the data set he uses in that presentation (may not be the same as the data he used for the 2014 presentation) is 80,000 unique new players.

The actual statements by CCP Rise in relation to griefing new players start at 2:35 in the presentation (below link) and the bit just prior explains the context for why:

https://youtu.be/A92Ge2S8M1Y?list=PLQvKSs1k6DLOiGGb44McruXcndTtzUUlu&t=150

If the basis of our discussion is that we believe CCP are either lying or don't know how to isolate unique users; but yet still say that is what the data was for, then we are totally up **** creek without a paddle.

Without individually going and verifying the actual data ourselves (and none of us have the resources to do so), then there is an element of trust that we have to place in the information that CCP provide and the statements they make.

If they are just fabricating everything, then nothing any of us say has any meaning if it relies on those statements.

As for multiple accounts in the same fleet. Sure. But are you trying to say that all characters in fleet chat are just 1 guy and his alts? That multiple players don't use fleet chat and that CCP don't know that a use of fleet chat is one thing that correlates with activities of the group of players that are retained in the long term?


Yes, this is also something CCP have stated correlates with higher chance of retention.

What data they base that on, I don't know; but I've never seen anyone of us in the forum disagree with that being an indicator of social connection.

We haven't seen any results, nor do we understand what timeframe CCP are expecting/hoping for change to occur.

Overnight turnaround is not going to happen, so whether it is a success or failure, we don't know yet.

CCP are not trying to force anyone to do anything and as the example of CCP Veritas shows, many players are perfectly happy with solo play and will be retained in the long term.

It's just not the norm and so many players leave, having never discovered the rich experience that will keep them around. That's what CCP is trying to change.


Yes he states what they are doing, but not why (which was the extrapolation of the data made and the data was used to justify that conclusion).

It can be an opinion, no problem. But it can't be justified with that information.

The only thing that indicated a why was that CCP know the old NPE pushed players in that direction.

It's not a valid conclusion from that presentation to say that those plays came looking for that style of play.

It's perfectly fine to have the opinion that people "arrive expecting to be able to play some classic MMO gameplay with some "quests" and whatnot", but you'd need to provide your own data to support that. Nothing CCP have said can be used to add weight to that argument.

Ahhh there is the arrogant and self-aggrandizing Lucas we've all come to love and know. Also, and excellent example of your inability to comprehend the written medium. I did not say that ganking is my preferred activity in Eve, nor did anything I write indicate that ganking is not boring…for some.

That is indeed your opinion. Ours seem to differ.

I'm not. I have a hypothesis, this is the only data available, and the data could support it. Nobody can say for sure if it does or doesn't, but it's a viable assessment. I still think it's far less likely that 40% of players stumble by accident into a type of gameplay they weren't aiming to get in there and stay longer than the 50% "leave after a couple of months" crowd, and far more likely that layers used to other types of game come here seeking similar gameplay in a different style. You seem to be of the impression that I need reams of data to be allowed my pinion, while you can categorically declare mine as wrong without any evidence of your own. Funny that.


Clearly you are going to argue literally everything. Obviously you are right. Players come here seeking diverse and engaging social content, fall into PvE by accident, which happens to be very similar in style to other far more popular MMOs. They then stay trapped in that paying for a sub they don't actually want until they eventually leave.

Lol. You were right earlier, it's impossible to have a reasonable discussion with you over this, so I'm ending it.

Actually I have the resources to do it...just not the data.

And I bet I'm not the only one who has access to lots of computing power.

But I get what you are saying. We either go with this data being Truth™ or we just stop talking about it completely.

I like your post, but I will point out one thing which I believe is a fallacy. There is no expectation that 100% of corps out there will succeed. I don't see why it's a problem if 90% of the poorly run and poorly defended corps are destroyed by better organized and better armed ones. The non consensual PVP sandbox is a dog eat dog universe.

Does the dial on attackers vs. defenders need to be adjusted? I can be convinced of that, if someone can provide me some statistically backed argument as to why this is necessary. (Yes Lucas, I do see your wardec statistics, but I think the numbers are contrived).





This is a value judgment on your part.. made no less as part of the losing side of a conflict. I don't think this is an objective view. People do stuff in games for various reasons, and within the bounds of the EULA all of those reasons are equally as sound. Being noble, or a great tactician like Robert E Lee instead of like Ulysses Grant.. these are all personal values, not universal ones.



I agree with you, Wardecs need to be reimagined.. but not for reasons of rookie lambs dying to some imaginary slaughter, or because players should be safe anywhere in space (they shouldn't be).

Looks like a lot of you guys are getting better at actually understanding others' positions and some of your own shortcomings in your arguments, however grudging it is to acknowledge. I still hate you though.