These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

CCP Rise newbie stats

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Vyl Vit
#61 - 2015-03-22 14:49:55 UTC
Thales wrote:
Something very wrong here, 100% of new players should be dying, as two of the misions at least DEMAND you die to show you how it works.

So if they are not dying they are not doing the starter missions.

Or does it mean Poddeath? Ganking and grief killing of player ships does not automatically mean poddeath.

Without some qualified info this report is worse than meaningless.
Only if they take the advanced military tutorial.

Paradise is like where you are right now, only much, much better.
Thales
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#62 - 2015-03-22 14:53:04 UTC
Vyl Vit wrote:
Thales wrote:
Something very wrong here, 100% of new players should be dying, as two of the misions at least DEMAND you die to show you how it works.

So if they are not dying they are not doing the starter missions.

Or does it mean Poddeath? Ganking and grief killing of player ships does not automatically mean poddeath.

Without some qualified info this report is worse than meaningless.
Only if they take the advanced military tutorial.


Exactly, If they have given up by this point, they are unlikely to have learned anything. I find it hard to believe that almost 90% of the new players have given up before even getting started.
If so, we have a much bigger problem to address.
Black Pedro
Mine.
#63 - 2015-03-22 14:58:49 UTC
Thales wrote:
Vyl Vit wrote:
Thales wrote:
Something very wrong here, 100% of new players should be dying, as two of the misions at least DEMAND you die to show you how it works.

So if they are not dying they are not doing the starter missions.

Or does it mean Poddeath? Ganking and grief killing of player ships does not automatically mean poddeath.

Without some qualified info this report is worse than meaningless.
Only if they take the advanced military tutorial.


Exactly, If they have given up by this point, they are unlikely to have learned anything. I find it hard to believe that almost 90% of the new players have given up before even getting started.
If so, we have a much bigger problem to address.

Umm. Did you guys watch the presentation? The statistics are for deaths (ship losses) to other players, not NPCs.

The 8 Golden Rules of Eve

Why Do They Gank?
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#64 - 2015-03-22 15:01:35 UTC
Thales wrote:
Vyl Vit wrote:
Thales wrote:
Something very wrong here, 100% of new players should be dying, as two of the misions at least DEMAND you die to show you how it works.

So if they are not dying they are not doing the starter missions.

Or does it mean Poddeath? Ganking and grief killing of player ships does not automatically mean poddeath.

Without some qualified info this report is worse than meaningless.
Only if they take the advanced military tutorial.


Exactly, If they have given up by this point, they are unlikely to have learned anything. I find it hard to believe that almost 90% of the new players have given up before even getting started.
If so, we have a much bigger problem to address.

If "not dying at all" also means they do not complete the tutorial, there is a bigger problem with NPE ... though I assume it's about dying to PvP action, but I don't know the source of the numbers.

I'm my own NPC alt.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#65 - 2015-03-22 16:24:33 UTC
Serene Repose wrote:
Harrison Tato wrote:
Serene Repose wrote:
I'd cry for the future of humanity, but I have four kids competing with these people IRL and I anticipate a nice, well-funded old age, judging by the strength of the competition. I tell you what. Let's have these flashes of human brilliance dictate the design of something very complicated, intricate and aesthetically superior. Good idea? R i i i i i ght! Cool
I wouldn't count my sheep just yet. My experience in the corporate world says that your kids will be getting coffee for the illiterate people you are complaining about.
Never underestimate the power of the phd. I doubt these folks would be allowed in the same building.
Come to think if it...they aren't!
In the UK a PH.D generally makes you less employable. Better to put just your masters on your C.V.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Serene Repose
#66 - 2015-03-22 16:54:01 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Umm. Did you guys watch the presentation? The statistics are for deaths (ship losses) to other players, not NPCs.
Are you having trouble keeping up with the conversation, hon?

We must accommodate the idiocracy.
Serene Repose
#67 - 2015-03-22 16:56:42 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
In the UK a PH.D generally makes you less employable. Better to put just your masters on your C.V.
Welp. In the UK you hardly ever see that big yellow ball up in the sky! Come to where the living is. Come to South Florida. It's only going up to 85 F today! I guess that's 29.4 C.

We must accommodate the idiocracy.
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#68 - 2015-03-22 17:05:24 UTC
Serene Repose wrote:
Black Pedro wrote:
Umm. Did you guys watch the presentation? The statistics are for deaths (ship losses) to other players, not NPCs.
Are you having trouble keeping up with the conversation, hon?

the people pedro quoted thought the stats in the op included npc deaths. pedro corrected them.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#69 - 2015-03-22 17:47:43 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:


[quote=Nexus Day]Yay, stats with no background. I love them because you can interpret them any way you want!

Here we go!

The stats are bad news. If newbies aren't dying to gankers one can surmise that they are not leaving stations or exploring much of EvE. This would mean the new player experience is extremely lacking to the point a new player doesn't stick around long enough to die to a ganker. They die to Concord in hi-sec, but never leave hi-sec.

All of these are as supportable as any other guess as to what the stats mean.

Lies, statistics and lies.


This is a perfect example of how bias skews point of view.

The above poster really believes their is a 'lot of ganking going on' and that there is a high chance of it, and also that such ganking is responsible for people leaving the game (which is the way the people who hate ganking try to magnify a personal dislike to the level of public crisis, the anti-afk cloak crowd does the same thing with their "cloakers make people stop playing and leave the game" when there is not evidence).

The real truth to be glean from these newbie stats, and also by the fanfest presentation that revealed that only something like 3 million hit points worth of damage is done per day by CONCORD (which is nothing) is this: Ganking is actually very rare in High Sec and you pretty much have to be doing something greedy or stupid to encounter it unless you are "real life lottery odds" unlucky enough to encounter a 'luls gankers'.

2 weeks ago I suffered from my very 1st 'lulz' gank in high sec in which I lost a Minmatar Shuttle and an implantless pod (I light cynos with Jenn sometimes and so J/C into that clone. 1 such gank since I start playing EVE in June of 2007 (ie one such gank in almost 8 years). That means I'm like 2 weeks late on the standard high sec "run to the forums and declare exploit of something that is legitimate gameplay" way of thinking.
flakeys
Doomheim
#70 - 2015-03-22 17:53:31 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
flakeys wrote:
In it's current form this data provides nothing of value.Error randomize is spot on with his assesment of it.

Even if you do get the full data it still does not represent anything to ''the threat of empire ganking'' , not saying there is a 'threat'' though , as a 15 days old char hardly ever flies anything worthy of a gank and is more often docked or in the newbie zone then anywhere else.Now the ones who WE view as noobs , characters who are say a month or 3 old , they can fly something of value to be lost and also will be flying outside the newbie zones mostly.


I don't know, even if you somehow discount the data regarding 15-day old players as not representative, the fact that "<1% of account cancellations cite ship loss or harassment" is pretty telling. People don't (at least in significant numbers) quit the game over suicide ganking in highsec.
.


As said the data is too vague and EVEN if you would fill in the blank spots to accomodate your ''crusade to the defense of ganking'' then still you forget the part where a 15 day trial/player will at most be flying a T1 cruiser and as such would allways be of little value to be ganked.

The data is useless in it's current shape and it is useless when given fully if you want to use it to see if players do leave the game because they have been ganked.For that you would need the data of 1 to 6 month old characters as they fly stuff more worthy of a gank and that COULD give a vague idea as to the true '''threat'' ganking has on pushing newbro's out of the game.But then you are still dealing with a verry high amount of ''alts'' who will **** up your data research entirely.

Don't get me wrong , i am not against ganking . Ganking in general doesn't ''make me hot or cold'' so i could not care less if CCP would do something to make ganking harder or easier.The data provided however is useless to stand as a point to use for or against it's effect .

We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
Serene Repose
#71 - 2015-03-22 18:00:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Serene Repose
Jenn aSide wrote:
run to the forums and declare exploit of something that is legitimate gameplay" way of thinking.
Exaggerate the point of view of others MUCH? The pro-ganking, "oh gee what if management listens to these people" crowd (firstly sure seems a bit nervous like they're not quite sure what they do is on the up and up) sure does kick up a dust storm then blame it on everyone else who tries to refute or correct their (from) way off to outlandish so-called data.

Where there's smoke, there's fire? Or, the squeaky wheel gets the grease. Whatever it may be, they're about as reliable for information on this subject as my dog is on does he really need to go outside, or is he just BORED? Usually he's bored, or he wants to survey his acreage from a hilltop. Not a lot of territorial pissing there...
so maybe that analogy is a bit off.

Oh yes. One more thing. It never fails when you get irrefutable statistical analysis someone will offer an anecdote..."Well, looky what happened to ME!" Shocked I guess that story is supposed to sh*tcan the numbers, 'cause whatever happened to you MUST be the book on this matter, and in all others! (I wish my life was that definitive!)

We must accommodate the idiocracy.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#72 - 2015-03-22 18:02:57 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
Rise's whole point with that example is that sometimes your impressions/assumptions don't match reality like in this case.


That's true in so many things, even in real life. People think a certain reaction to some horrific event is 'common sense' when in reality that reaction makes things worse.It even happens to developers which is why we sometimes see things aimed at retaining players pushing players away in many games not just EVE.

I think it's because when people hate something, they demonize it and see no redeeming value in it (because if it had a single redeeming value, they couldn't hate it as much, and they want to hate it). Some people hate ganking, scamming, non-consensual pvp and a lot of other aspects of EVE so they automatically assume that those things are the causes of other bad things like people quitting.

The irony here is that they believe these things make people quit but the fact that THEY THEMSELVES didn't quit should be proof enough that it doesn't work that way. It's like they suffer from a form of 'false-uniqueness' belief ie "ganking makes people quit, I hate it too but I didn't quit because Im better than them".

In fact, the most probable truth of the matter is that ganking and such probably HELPS the game keep people (by causing the kind of emotional connection that hooks a person to a situation). This is why in sports many coaches and trainers will say that losing is way more valuable than winning for making a person want to get better and stay in that sport.

It suggests that a main culprit in losing new players could be too much safety in high sec... I do, of course, realize that saying that to these "ganking is bad" types is the same as saying that eating some meat is ok and even good for a person to a Militant 'meat is murder' Vegan lol.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#73 - 2015-03-22 18:08:05 UTC
Serene Repose wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
run to the forums and declare exploit of something that is legitimate gameplay" way of thinking.
Exaggerate the point of view of others MUCH? The pro-ganking, "oh gee what if management listens to these people" crowd (firstly sure seems a bit nervous like they're not quite sure what they do is on the up and up) sure does kick up a dust storm then blame it on everyone else who tries to refute or correct their (from) way off to outlandish so-called data.

Where there's smoke, there's fire? Or, the squeaky wheel gets the grease. Whatever it may be, they're about as reliable for information on this subject as my dog is on does he really need to go outside, or is he just BORED? Usually he's bored, or he wants to survey his acreage from a hilltop. Not a lot of territorial pissing there...
so maybe that analogy is a bit off.


rofl, in typical fashion you reply to a post describing a bias with your own biased post.

I'm exaggerating nothing as I never claimed everyone does it. But you know as well as I do (even if you ay not be honest enough to admit it) that from time to time there have been posts on this very forum from some freshly ganked person declaring that what happened to them is wrong and that all manner of evil should befall the people who in reality were just playing the game within it's rules.

We get it, you don;'t like ganking and ANY bit of information that goes against your preconceived notion rankles you. Do't try to pretend it's a problem with someone else, rather the information presented in this tread should (for the person mature enough to understand it) begin a process of slef-evaluation that would eventually (after many decades) lead you to be less wrong about, well, everything you ever post about lol.
Serene Repose
#74 - 2015-03-22 18:09:16 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
That's true in so many things, even in real life. People think a certain reaction to some horrific event is 'common sense' when in reality that reaction makes things worse.It even happens to developers which is why we sometimes see things aimed at retaining players pushing players away in many games not just EVE.
So...it must be incumbent on YOU to guide the devs in the right direction despite themselves, and of course the "right" direction is always YOUR direction...'cause you have a "I'm always right" gene. *envy envy envy*

Do you ever stop at some point, or can you swing this digital hammer into oblivion for us?

We must accommodate the idiocracy.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#75 - 2015-03-22 18:15:40 UTC
flakeys wrote:
Black Pedro wrote:
flakeys wrote:
In it's current form this data provides nothing of value.Error randomize is spot on with his assesment of it.

Even if you do get the full data it still does not represent anything to ''the threat of empire ganking'' , not saying there is a 'threat'' though , as a 15 days old char hardly ever flies anything worthy of a gank and is more often docked or in the newbie zone then anywhere else.Now the ones who WE view as noobs , characters who are say a month or 3 old , they can fly something of value to be lost and also will be flying outside the newbie zones mostly.


I don't know, even if you somehow discount the data regarding 15-day old players as not representative, the fact that "<1% of account cancellations cite ship loss or harassment" is pretty telling. People don't (at least in significant numbers) quit the game over suicide ganking in highsec.
.


As said the data is too vague and EVEN if you would fill in the blank spots to accomodate your ''crusade to the defense of ganking'' then still you forget the part where a 15 day trial/player will at most be flying a T1 cruiser and as such would allways be of little value to be ganked.

The data is useless in it's current shape and it is useless when given fully if you want to use it to see if players do leave the game because they have been ganked.For that you would need the data of 1 to 6 month old characters as they fly stuff more worthy of a gank and that COULD give a vague idea as to the true '''threat'' ganking has on pushing newbro's out of the game.But then you are still dealing with a verry high amount of ''alts'' who will **** up your data research entirely.

Don't get me wrong , i am not against ganking . Ganking in general doesn't ''make me hot or cold'' so i could not care less if CCP would do something to make ganking harder or easier.The data provided however is useless to stand as a point to use for or against it's effect .


Translation: when data doesn't say what I need it to say, it's vague. When it does, it's right!

This is why discussion with other people (in real life as well as when about a game, see : Politics) is generally futile. You all know the truth, NO amount of data will convince people who are already convinced. CCP could flat out say ganking is good and present graphs and the same people would claim it's a lie, but a graph showing that ganking causes unsubs would be posted on 17 blogs within an hour.


Now, me personally, I don't defend ganking (it's not something I find fun so I don't do it). What I defend is the EVE way of gaming, the idea that interesting things should happen in a game, and that players in a sandbox should understand that some fool will always kick sand in your face and you should deal with that instead of running to mommy. Just as with AFK-cloaking, I've suffered only one gank in 8 years because I protected myself and for myself and prevented gankers from getting me.

It's not the gankers fault that some players wouldn't know what self reliance and personal responsibility were if it bit them in the arse parts.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#76 - 2015-03-22 18:20:11 UTC
Serene Repose wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
That's true in so many things, even in real life. People think a certain reaction to some horrific event is 'common sense' when in reality that reaction makes things worse.It even happens to developers which is why we sometimes see things aimed at retaining players pushing players away in many games not just EVE.
So...it must be incumbent on YOU to guide the devs in the right direction despite themselves, and of course the "right" direction is always YOUR direction...'cause you have a "I'm always right" gene. *envy envy envy*

Do you ever stop at some point, or can you swing this digital hammer into oblivion for us?


This is just a bitter person's emotional reaction to being proved wrong, and it's unworthy of an adult. You keep trying to make it about me, when I'm simply commenting on the game same as you.

This is one of those "people point on the doll where Jenn touched you moments". While such a reaction wasn't something I sought, it's hilarious nonetheless.

For the record, the 'right direction' is the right direction, it has nothing whatsoever to do with what I personally want, If it were up to me there would be no high sec, but that would be wrong because high sec is a necessary evil (see what I can do that you can't serene? I can point to something that I don't like and see the good in it).
Black Pedro
Mine.
#77 - 2015-03-22 18:24:49 UTC
flakeys wrote:
As said the data is too vague and EVEN if you would fill in the blank spots to accomodate your ''crusade to the defense of ganking'' then still you forget the part where a 15 day trial/player will at most be flying a T1 cruiser and as such would allways be of little value to be ganked.


I am on no crusade. I am just repeating what CCP Rise said yesterday. I don't have access to CCP's internal data, nor have done any analysis myself. However, CCP Rise and his team DO have access to the data you say you need to be convinced, and I have no reason to believe he is trying to mislead me.

If new players are of "little value" for gankers, then why do so many players believe that ganking of new players is a significant problem for player retention like the 80%+ of the audience in Rise's talk? I find it interesting that so many of them come here to the forums arguing for more nerfs to ganking to protect the new players, when you yourself admit that they are not especially desirable targets and Rise showed that they rarely get ganked. Further, Rise's data shows that isolating them from the sandbox is likely to decrease the chance for them to stay in the game.

It's all very interesting.

The 8 Golden Rules of Eve

Why Do They Gank?
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#78 - 2015-03-22 18:43:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Black Pedro wrote:


I am on no crusade. I am just repeating what CCP Rise said yesterday. I don't have access to CCP's internal data, nor have done any analysis myself. However, CCP Rise and his team DO have access to the data you say you need to be convinced, and I have no reason to believe he is trying to mislead me.


That part is priceless. In the past, when I've suggested that certain imbalances exist or that things aren't as bad as some people claim, a standard retort has been "CCP has the Data". But as soon as CCP says something they don't like, it's "CCP must be wrong". This proof positive that some people are only interested in their own narrow beliefs and (sometimes) an agenda rather than the truth of the matter.

This is not to say that CCP can't be wrong, they can, I just find it funny how some people's trust in CCP is conditional upon whether or not CCP validates their preconceived notions.

Quote:

If new players are of "little value" for gankers, then why do so many players believe that ganking of new players is a significant problem for player retention like the 80%+ of the audience in Rise's talk? I find it interesting that so many of them come here to the forums arguing for more nerfs to ganking to protect the new players, when you yourself admit that they are not especially desirable targets and Rise showed that they rarely get ganked. Further, Rise's data shows that isolating them from the sandbox is likely to decrease the chance for them to stay in the game.

It's all very interesting.


I think it's a couple of things.

First, the anti-ganking crowd is a bunch of 'bleeding hearts' who display "think of the children' mentality instead of understanding that new players are (mostly) adults like they were when they started playing. The honestly 'feel sorry' for the perceived injustices that happen to new players and believe (naively but sincerely) that if that didn't happen those new players would be happier and stay longer.

(It's for these types that the idea that ganking them might actually be helping them is anathema lol, as I mentioned earlier it's like showing a PETA member that some meat is good for humans lol)

The second group is more sinister. They have been ganked in something expensive, didn't like how that made them feel at all, and went on a crusade to end this evil once and for all lol. They HATE gankers as people and their whining to CCP is actually "meta-gaming" They are trying to meta-game that 'mean people' completely out of the game so they can crunch rocks or npcs in peace.

Both of the above types are wrong, just one types is way more wrong that the other lol.
Aralyn Cormallen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#79 - 2015-03-22 18:48:40 UTC
Serene Repose wrote:
So...it must be incumbent on YOU to guide the devs in the right direction despite themselves, and of course the "right" direction is always YOUR direction...'cause you have a "I'm always right" gene. *envy envy envy*

Do you ever stop at some point, or can you swing this digital hammer into oblivion for us?


That is a hilarious post to make by someone who has spent the past two pages disregarding CCP's comments and statistics. I mean, really?
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#80 - 2015-03-22 18:55:14 UTC
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:
Serene Repose wrote:
So...it must be incumbent on YOU to guide the devs in the right direction despite themselves, and of course the "right" direction is always YOUR direction...'cause you have a "I'm always right" gene. *envy envy envy*

Do you ever stop at some point, or can you swing this digital hammer into oblivion for us?


That is a hilarious post to make by someone who has spent the past two pages disregarding CCP's comments and statistics. I mean, really?


Yes really and the hypocrisy is unimaginable lol, but at least she did mention how massive my "Digital Hammer" was so that's a plus... Twisted