These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

NPE feedback Q and A

First post First post First post
Author
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#201 - 2015-07-03 15:16:57 UTC  |  Edited by: FT Diomedes
Aerasia wrote:
FT Diomedes wrote:
By my calculations, that is about 1,584,833 SP.
Not bad, but I'd probably trim the multi-racial spread and put in a couple of things like {Race} Frigate/Weapon V. Along with specializing in the race appropriate tanking, you should then have a character ready for combat with basic T2 fits (assuming they can gather the ISK), and it's just a quick step from their to either spreading out into advanced Frigates, or moving up the ship classes to Destroyer/Cruiser.


To me, the multi-racial spread keeps people from feeling pigeon-holed early on. The player can mess around with cheap ships while he decides which direction to go. There are no real drawbacks to being able to fly any T1 frigate in the game.

Remember: T2 ships are specialized. Specialization is best done on an alt or after a player has messed around a bit. If I have to buy ice cream for 23 unknown people, I am not going to buy Pralines & Cream. Not everyone will like it. I am going to buy Neapolitan - so they have three flavors from which to choose!

Having a choice of tanking options available for different ships in different situations is also a good thing. Having a few extra shield HP helps armor ships out too. And vice versa.

As for concerns that people will dual or triple tank their ships because they can, that should be mitigated by a tutorial or guide to ship-fitting theory. The last time I did the tutorial, one of the missions involved learning different types of tanking. It was not the best teaching guide, if I recall, but at least it was an attempt.

In addition to the pigeon-holing aspect, adding Racial Frigate V and Racial Small Turret V as starting skills puts you up over 2m SP. Starting off a new player in an Assault Frigate will take you to almost 2.5m SP. Just getting into Interceptors takes you up to 2.7m SP. You also have the issue that there are still a lot of skills before you can really fly the T2 ships. Notice that a player will still have to train a bunch of support skills for gunnery, missiles, drones, etc. before he can get really good. Flying a T2 ship without the proper skill base is not the path to success.

Edit - not to mention that I think it is a bad idea to start every single new character out with the ability to fly an Interceptor. New players would not be the only ones benefiting from that.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Aerasia
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#202 - 2015-07-03 15:36:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Aerasia
FT Diomedes wrote:
Flying a T2 ship without the proper skill base is not the path to success.
Really? People keep saying that flying T1 with only 50k SP is perfectly fine/it's why EVE is great/HTFU. You're right in that a player with only three days experience under their belt probably shouldn't be flying a Vengeance. On the other hand, I'm hard pressed to give a reason why they shouldn't be allowed to.

For myself, I worry about the breadth of choice offered by the ability to move into different ship types greater than that offered by crossing factions. Most roles in the game are represented in the Frigate size, so starting a character off with a solid competency in a single race's ships is trading the "Pulse Laser vs. Autocannon" option for being able to quickly branch out into AF/CovOps/Ewar/Inty. Other than the AF, I think most of those only require a single V (beyond Frigate) to be trained to sit in the hull.

FT Diomedes wrote:
In addition to the pigeon-holing aspect, adding Racial Frigate V and Racial Small Turret V as starting skills puts you up over 2m SP.
And really, if I had my way new players would start with a lot more SP than that.
Skir Skor
Stay Frosty.
A Band Apart.
#203 - 2015-07-03 15:45:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Skir Skor
Best of luck to the new player who uses this as a resource.

https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/New_Pilot_101

https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Category:New_Player_Experience

No way I'd of made it thru the trial period using CCP's wiki
SilentAsTheGrave
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#204 - 2015-07-03 15:56:54 UTC
If I understand correctly; CCP will remove the learning implants if something of the same value on the market can replace it?
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#205 - 2015-07-03 16:05:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Joe Risalo
Quote:
Q: 'Attributes aren't very interesting, you should remove them'
A: Again, we agree. Team Size Matters discussed removing them on the o7 show (or some other public venue) awhile back and it's still something we are very interested in. We need to figure out a good way to handle all the learning implants in the game though, which is actually a difficult problem. If any of you have awesome ideas for how to handle it don't hesitate to make suggestions.


REMOVE THE IMPLANTS

Instead, allow players to fit implants from slots 6-10 into these slots.
HOWEVER, you CANNOT stack them. So you can't fit 2 - 5% heavy missile damage implants.

This would allow players to implant for 2 ships instead of 1, or can mix and match implants that will help fitting AND damage of active ship.

As far as pirate implants, allow them to keep their current bonus; However, to replace the attribute bonus, allow them to give an additional % bonus in the co-slot.
IE, if you have a 5% heavy missile implant in slot 7, putting a pirate implant, in slot 2, will give you the standard bonus plus an additional 1-2% buff to heavy missiles.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#206 - 2015-07-03 16:28:48 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:

Q: 'Starting skills are a huge barrier, can we give a lot more to new players'
A: Yes. But this is not a simple change. You guys seem fairly agreed that the small amount of starting skills, combined with a high amount of 'must have' support and requirement skills, leads to some really icky barriers to participation for new players. We are inclined to agree and we are in the process of laying out a plan to address the problem. Nothing is set in stone yet but it seems likely that we will try and move new players towards starting with significantly more SP. Maybe between 1 and 2 million. It also seems likely that we will probably avoid any major skill reworks or skill removals. As this plan solidifies you will hear more from us.




Idea on this...

I'm assuming you're talking about the very basic of skills, when you refer to this.
Targeting, warp drive operation, base capacitor, cpu, and pg skill (drawing a blank atm on names, lol), and many other base skills.

Instead of removing them, incorporate them into a training program; HOWEVER, they're instant skills.
Meaning, when you train them, it only takes 1-5 seconds per level.

They can be used to train newbros on skills and skill training and how they apply to stats, while also giving them a sense of gratification. These skills have the added bonus of players experiencing the benefits of skill training and how it effects them, much sooner.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#207 - 2015-07-03 16:47:42 UTC
You see, another reason why we cannot have a good NPE is because CCP wastes dev resources on something like this or on making the launcher worse with every iteration. Now the username/password input fields wobble and change size. Woohoo. What kind of purpose does this stupidity par excellence serve that is more important than actually making the launcher work and equip it with much needed functionality and stability?

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

SandKid
Sunset Logistics Company
#208 - 2015-07-03 17:43:33 UTC
On Starting Skills...

I personally think the starting skills are just fine where they are. I have yet to see a situation where a new player was unable to participate in any portion of the game. The one exception I can think of is WH exploration because getting scanning skills up far enough to probe yourself takes a little bit (like a week...oh noz).

Keep in mind that the more SP you grant, the quicker the skill queue becomes boring. Veterans aren't affected by this but new players are. If the first skills they train take a day or longer, they'll quickly become bored from the lack of perceived progress.

THIS KILLS PLAYER RETENTION.

Everybody can agree that one of the key 'progress' feedback in EvE is the "Skill Training Completed". New players get a sense for their first month or so that, every day, they are becoming more powerful. Eventually they appreciate the skills that take 10, 20, and 30 days to complete for just one level...but to gain that appreciation, they must first appreciate the baby steps.

With this in mind I think that ACTUAL problem is that the Career Agents offer duplicate skillbooks, and non-essential skillbooks many other posters to this thread have referenced (Such as Hull Upgrades or Trade skills). A new player - even one specializing in a specific game style, regardless of type, should be learning at least two skill levels every day for the first two weeks. That keeps the aforementioned 'progress feedback' intact and meaningful.

The skill system exists not to create barriers to entry, but to create appreciation for what can be accessed with committed training. Let's be honest here, every single tech 1 ship of a given faction can be used with basic effectiveness in a matter of two months. That isn't a barrier to play in any way. All tech 1 frigates can be used with basic effectiveness in one week or less. Will a one week old character in an alliance blob likely not last long or get blapped frequently in pirate gangs? Yeah, what do you expect?

Will they appreciate those first kills and aspire to training towards a role that best serves their newfound home corporation? Yes, they will. These are all good things and proof that the current starter pool of sp is not the problem. How the new skillbooks at the beginning are seeded to a new player could be improved.
Ohh Yeah
Jerkasaurus Wrecks Inc.
Sedition.
#209 - 2015-07-03 17:55:10 UTC
SandKid wrote:
On Starting Skills...

I personally think the starting skills are just fine where they are. I have yet to see a situation where a new player was unable to participate in any portion of the game. The one exception I can think of is WH exploration because getting scanning skills up far enough to probe yourself takes a little bit (like a week...oh noz).

Keep in mind that the more SP you grant, the quicker the skill queue becomes boring. Veterans aren't affected by this but new players are. If the first skills they train take a day or longer, they'll quickly become bored from the lack of perceived progress.

THIS KILLS PLAYER RETENTION.

Everybody can agree that one of the key 'progress' feedback in EvE is the "Skill Training Completed". New players get a sense for their first month or so that, every day, they are becoming more powerful. Eventually they appreciate the skills that take 10, 20, and 30 days to complete for just one level...but to gain that appreciation, they must first appreciate the baby steps.

With this in mind I think that ACTUAL problem is that the Career Agents offer duplicate skillbooks, and non-essential skillbooks many other posters to this thread have referenced (Such as Hull Upgrades or Trade skills). A new player - even one specializing in a specific game style, regardless of type, should be learning at least two skill levels every day for the first two weeks. That keeps the aforementioned 'progress feedback' intact and meaningful.

The skill system exists not to create barriers to entry, but to create appreciation for what can be accessed with committed training. Let's be honest here, every single tech 1 ship of a given faction can be used with basic effectiveness in a matter of two months. That isn't a barrier to play in any way. All tech 1 frigates can be used with basic effectiveness in one week or less. Will a one week old character in an alliance blob likely not last long or get blapped frequently in pirate gangs? Yeah, what do you expect?

Will they appreciate those first kills and aspire to training towards a role that best serves their newfound home corporation? Yes, they will. These are all good things and proof that the current starter pool of sp is not the problem. How the new skillbooks at the beginning are seeded to a new player could be improved.


You realize they can start you out with 2m SP in "core" fitting skills and still leave tons of "fun", short trains like gunnery supports and so on.
Random Bacon
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#210 - 2015-07-03 18:13:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Random Bacon
Moac Tor wrote:
Random Bacon wrote:
This is the most painful part for me, by far. It's one month to do anything other than mining effectively (unless you have massive support). What I did notice is that training a venture from scratch and moving into a retriever would turn over enough for a plex by the end of month 1, albeit grinding rocks for 10hours a day to hit this theoretical turnover. Being competitive in PvP still takes 2-3months of dedicated skilling (2 with an Int/Mem remap for competency skills, mid-neutral Perc / Will+Mem for the ships / weapons / drones)

I've had new players who are a couple of weeks old play the crucial role in taking down 200 - 300 mil ships in small gang pvp (3 - 4 pilot fleets). I let them keep the deadspace module that dropped and it made their day. You sound to me like your looking at everything from a solo isk/hour perspective which is the worst way to play the game, and certainly the NPE shouldn't cater for that playstyle.


The ISK/hr concerns weren't for me, if new players want to grind isk to play for free, they'll do so from day one, and it's possible.

I'm a returning player that rolled a new account. Whilst it trains to what I need it for it's essentially dead, as I don't want to commit it to a corporation / alliance that is hostile to the corporation / alliance I eventually put both in after fozziesov.

With that said, I understand your points.


I'm fully behind a new player mission agent that adds loyalty points that can be converted to skill points in select skills like tanking as long as it had a limit to the number of converted SP and a limit to the skills it can be applied to.
SilentAsTheGrave
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#211 - 2015-07-03 18:14:43 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
Quote:
Q: 'Attributes aren't very interesting, you should remove them'
A: Again, we agree. Team Size Matters discussed removing them on the o7 show (or some other public venue) awhile back and it's still something we are very interested in. We need to figure out a good way to handle all the learning implants in the game though, which is actually a difficult problem. If any of you have awesome ideas for how to handle it don't hesitate to make suggestions.


REMOVE THE IMPLANTS

Instead, allow players to fit implants from slots 6-10 into these slots.
HOWEVER, you CANNOT stack them. So you can't fit 2 - 5% heavy missile damage implants.

This would allow players to implant for 2 ships instead of 1, or can mix and match implants that will help fitting AND damage of active ship.

As far as pirate implants, allow them to keep their current bonus; However, to replace the attribute bonus, allow them to give an additional % bonus in the co-slot.
IE, if you have a 5% heavy missile implant in slot 7, putting a pirate implant, in slot 2, will give you the standard bonus plus an additional 1-2% buff to heavy missiles.

No one fits pirate implants for the learning bonus.
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#212 - 2015-07-03 18:16:59 UTC
My .02


I think new players get too limited career options. We consider "mining and missioning" a career, or hauling and industry, and this is too boring and anti-interactive.

Missions are anti-interactive: one man one mission. OK they might bring friends and that's nice.

But the mission itself is too much like the mission or quest from other games that are not PVP centric and they come from WoW and go right into mission grind, seemingly just trading a sword for lasers and playing the same game.

New missions that cause competition between players that's intended could be a huge help. Getting your damsel stolen looks like greifing and in spite of how many will say it's not, it still looks like it and that's all that matters.

I would recommend then missions that actually cause players to fight each other. This could be along faction lines even, similar to FW. Still a PVP - PVe hybrid could be hard on noobs. I would do it like this:


Level 1 hybrid missions: More than one player getting the same mission that has only one mission item. He who can fight his way to it gets it first. No other engagement allowed.

Level 2 hybrid missions: In this kind of hybrid mission, Concord won't respond to players shooting each other. Gate filters would (and should) limit ship types and player SP if at all possible. You see if you can get them shooting each other, that good, but if you create an opportunity to bittervets to harvest easy kills, then you will (almost appearing out of thin air) get people who will have nothing to do all day except take L2 hybrids with their 100 million SP and claim they are not greifing.

Level 3 hybrid missions: These could be object or kill target missions whereby there is no Concord protection in the deadspace pockets, but each "room" is warp interdicted so that the only way to get from one to the other is to use the gates. This takes the engagement up a notch. First player to take out the boss wins. If it's an object retrieval, first to manage to escape with it wins. Imagine the lolage!

Level 4 hybrid missions: Elements of level 3 but I would include an opportunity for players adhering to pirate factions to get in on this fun. Imagine that you get a hybrid mission that is all about killing Serpentis for example. All well and good. Now imagine that someone wanting faction and LP from Serpentis is getting a mission to stop you from a Serpentis agent. A huge opportunity for Sansha sympathizers was missed with incursions. Imagine special incursion missions where the pro Sansha players (which were numerous back during live events) could help their Sansha bros along?

The idea behind all this is simple: get the players shooting each other. I know some would say that the players already do this "without any help from CCP" but they would also say that's not happening enough. On that line of thought, CCP should be removing all SOV mechanics and letting the players handle that too. But they do not. Therefore it's not a violation of some "rule" if CCP were to create PVP/PVe hybrid missions to goad the ants in the ant farm into a little conflict.

Once players reach that mission grinding and ship cherishing point, where their only success is ISK and shiney bling boats, they are lost to the core aspect of the game. Get new players who are going to run missions shooting each other and getting blapped early and they will have a seamless transition into pure player content. It's not helping the game that it can be treated like a single player video game.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!

Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#213 - 2015-07-03 18:24:29 UTC
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:
Quote:
Q: 'Attributes aren't very interesting, you should remove them'
A: Again, we agree. Team Size Matters discussed removing them on the o7 show (or some other public venue) awhile back and it's still something we are very interested in. We need to figure out a good way to handle all the learning implants in the game though, which is actually a difficult problem. If any of you have awesome ideas for how to handle it don't hesitate to make suggestions.


REMOVE THE IMPLANTS

Instead, allow players to fit implants from slots 6-10 into these slots.
HOWEVER, you CANNOT stack them. So you can't fit 2 - 5% heavy missile damage implants.

This would allow players to implant for 2 ships instead of 1, or can mix and match implants that will help fitting AND damage of active ship.

As far as pirate implants, allow them to keep their current bonus; However, to replace the attribute bonus, allow them to give an additional % bonus in the co-slot.
IE, if you have a 5% heavy missile implant in slot 7, putting a pirate implant, in slot 2, will give you the standard bonus plus an additional 1-2% buff to heavy missiles.

No one fits pirate implants for the learning bonus.


Well aware of that.
However, you can't take away the attribute bonuses and give them nothing.
Vic Jefferson
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#214 - 2015-07-03 18:32:41 UTC
Seems to me a whole lot of time was spent on the entire skill mastery system. If you do believe those skills are actually reflective of a 'mastery level' and you want to get people reasonably competent fast enough that the game is interesting through the first few months, why not base the give away SP on masteries?

I.E. I am a new minmatar player. After doing the tutorials, or opportunities, or preferably both, Aura asks me to tab to Interbus Ship Identification Tool, and pick two frigates. I select the probe and the rifter; all of the skills required to achieve mastery level 1 on both frigates are granted or levelled appropriately.

Now obviously there is a ton of room for min-maxing and aiming for masteries which gain more SP overall , or always taking frigates with different weapon systems, or always taking the exploration frigate. I would assume Gallente would always be the way to go due to the Tristan. Truth be told I wouldn't be opposed to just having mastery I in all T1 frigates of one race the first day - just figure out how much SP this is more or less, and give all existing players that much freely distributable SP.

After 12 years, the base skill point gain could use some looking at. Basically get rid of attributes, make the base rate of SP gain equal to having 30 in each attribute. Take each learning implant and make them a flat +% SP gain/hour; this would encourage people to have lots of cheaper implants. A full set of +3's would be +15%, a full set of +5s would be +25%, to an already accelerated rate. I completely realize that SP is a sensitive subject, especially for veterans are proud to have been with the game for a long time.

In running AT practices, it's something that routinely comes up - SP, SP, SP. We have people who have been playing for 2 or more years that still can't fly half the ships out there. I fully realize that the AT is a microcosm, but think of how new players must feel; it will be two YEARS before I could reasonably fly maybe half of that. That is a long commitment. In truth EvE is something that takes a long time to develop a finer palate to appreciate, but you do need to survive that initial period. SP should of course not be trivialized, its one of the things that makes EvE, EvE, but it is currently, and has been, a huge hurdle to getting people into the game.

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?

Kaivar Lancer
Doomheim
#215 - 2015-07-03 18:33:56 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:


Q: 'Starting skills are a huge barrier, can we give a lot more to new players'
A: Yes. But this is not a simple change. You guys seem fairly agreed that the small amount of starting skills, combined with a high amount of 'must have' support and requirement skills, leads to some really icky barriers to participation for new players. We are inclined to agree and we are in the process of laying out a plan to address the problem. Nothing is set in stone yet but it seems likely that we will try and move new players towards starting with significantly more SP. Maybe between 1 and 2 million. It also seems likely that we will probably avoid any major skill reworks or skill removals. As this plan solidifies you will hear more from us.


+1. I fight in low sec solo PVP and always feel a bit bad whenever I blap an under-skilled T1 frigate. But only a bit. I'd like to see more parity between newbie and veteran pilots, and have engagements decided by tactics and strategy rather than skillpoint disparity.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#216 - 2015-07-03 18:41:53 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:
Quote:
Q: 'Attributes aren't very interesting, you should remove them'
A: Again, we agree. Team Size Matters discussed removing them on the o7 show (or some other public venue) awhile back and it's still something we are very interested in. We need to figure out a good way to handle all the learning implants in the game though, which is actually a difficult problem. If any of you have awesome ideas for how to handle it don't hesitate to make suggestions.


REMOVE THE IMPLANTS

Instead, allow players to fit implants from slots 6-10 into these slots.
HOWEVER, you CANNOT stack them. So you can't fit 2 - 5% heavy missile damage implants.

This would allow players to implant for 2 ships instead of 1, or can mix and match implants that will help fitting AND damage of active ship.

As far as pirate implants, allow them to keep their current bonus; However, to replace the attribute bonus, allow them to give an additional % bonus in the co-slot.
IE, if you have a 5% heavy missile implant in slot 7, putting a pirate implant, in slot 2, will give you the standard bonus plus an additional 1-2% buff to heavy missiles.

No one fits pirate implants for the learning bonus.


Well aware of that.
However, you can't take away the attribute bonuses and give them nothing.


Of course you can! The Slave set is still worth the price even without the bonus to training speed. My characters with Slave sets in don't even need to train skills anymore.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#217 - 2015-07-03 18:52:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Catherine Laartii
CCP Rise wrote:


Q: 'Starting skills are a huge barrier, can we give a lot more to new players'
A: Yes. But this is not a simple change. You guys seem fairly agreed that the small amount of starting skills, combined with a high amount of 'must have' support and requirement skills, leads to some really icky barriers to participation for new players. We are inclined to agree and we are in the process of laying out a plan to address the problem. Nothing is set in stone yet but it seems likely that we will try and move new players towards starting with significantly more SP. Maybe between 1 and 2 million. It also seems likely that we will probably avoid any major skill reworks or skill removals. As this plan solidifies you will hear more from us.


Around 2 million would be ideal, and the tutorial should be refocused on training pilots on the skills they already HAVE, not say, 'here's a skillbook; wait a half hour for this to train up before you can use this thing we're giving you and talking about'.

New players should be able to have the following to start out with:
-fit afterburner and microwarp drive

-fit rigs

-fit salvagers

-fit tackle modules

-have relevant capacitor skills to 3

-have relevant primary sensor and targeting skills to 3

-have their native race's tanking (armor or shield) skills to 3, including active tanking skills

-have their races native frigate class ships trained to 3

-have astrometric skills to 3 and secondary skills to 2

-have primary resource processsing and industry skills to 3, and secondary skills to 2

-have mining frigate 1 trained

-have basic navigation skills to 3 and secondary skills to 2

-be able to use weapon upgrades effectively and include them in the combat and advanced combat sections of the tutorial

-have their native race's weapon system and secondary skills (gunnery, drones, missiles, etc) trained to 3. Pilots should be able to start out with both type of their race's weapon systems trained (ex. caldari pilots can use hybrids and missiles day 1)


That about covers it. Obviously secondary skills that require a lvl 5 or 4 skill prereq would not be trained day one; giving pilots the necessary amount of SP to be spaceworthy on day one is important, since it gives them a solid foundation to figure out where to specialize after they've run the tutorials and decide what they want to start out doing in the game.
Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#218 - 2015-07-03 19:17:21 UTC
Elsa Hayes wrote:
Reposting:

Today I was lurking in the recruitment chat and found a new guy asking around for a noob friendly corp, after some minutes, probably half an hour, he asked if this game hated new players since seemingly no one wanted to recruit him and all the people responding told him went to tell him to "sit it out " and wait a month or two.....even keeping in mind he was trolling is this for real?

Is this the new guy experience we have right now? It is bad enough that new chars start with literally nothing trained, they are given some skill books and even a cerebral booster but lets face it basically they are told, pay up and wait, come back later.





Rookie chat rules ban recruitment in that channel. This is why there were little or no answers. We sometimes bend the rules by listing a few new player friendly organizations but basically that was not the place to ask.

m

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)

Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#219 - 2015-07-03 19:48:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Phoenix Jones
Mike Azariah wrote:
Elsa Hayes wrote:
Reposting:

Today I was lurking in the recruitment chat and found a new guy asking around for a noob friendly corp, after some minutes, probably half an hour, he asked if this game hated new players since seemingly no one wanted to recruit him and all the people responding told him went to tell him to "sit it out " and wait a month or two.....even keeping in mind he was trolling is this for real?

Is this the new guy experience we have right now? It is bad enough that new chars start with literally nothing trained, they are given some skill books and even a cerebral booster but lets face it basically they are told, pay up and wait, come back later.





Rookie chat rules ban recruitment in that channel. This is why there were little or no answers. We sometimes bend the rules by listing a few new player friendly organizations but basically that was not the place to ask.

m


That... is kind of a problem.

Maybe something simple as having rookie chat and Recruitment channel up might help (though I know the spam in recruitment channel is bad especially for new players who would fall for day 1 scam corps).

I see the issue both ways.

How do you create cooperation and foster positive newbro experiences in a game based on not trusting anybody?

Someone (believe a CSM member, might have been you Mike), brought up the concept of mentors. Volunteers who focus on helping newbros and being a mentor. Those who are positive mentors get a positive rating, those who are bad mentors get a negative rating and are kicked out of the program.

That might help. I know there are already quite a few people who try to do this already (brave dojo, I know Kira has a channel going for that), etc.

It has to be easily accessible to the player, because finding a channel in-game is actually difficult and un-intuitive.

If you asked me now the steps you need to do to find a channel, find a mailing list, join a channel? I couldn't tell you.

Yaay!!!!

Vic Jefferson
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#220 - 2015-07-03 20:03:58 UTC
I know this is going to be questionably received, but I stand by it.

NPC null needs love for new players to have a PVP sanctuary.

If I was a new player now, where would I look to? I'd look to either Karmafleet or Pandemic Horde, or some other null entity that is looking for pilots en-masse. They have extremely available and accessible content and income. You don't have the SP to do WHs properly, FW is better played by alts than mains due to permanently ruining a faction standing, and most people get bored of hi-sec activities quite shortly, not to mention learning how to properly exploit incursions and level 4s takes a good deal of time and SP. In a nutshell, and probably quite an intended one, Sov null is a fairly attractive place to go as a newer player provided there are competent organizational structures in place. I personally have seen lots of players in my NPC null alliance leave for one of the 'newbie reddit sov' corps, almost exclusively for income purposes; there's no way to make money for the average new player in some NPC null locations.

Not everyone wants to be part of that though, nor do they have the time commitment to sign up for that. While they want the thrill of small gang pvp, its not practical to live in NPC null; there's no bread and butter income. If they were in Hi Sec, missions/incursions would keep them far wealthier than they could reasonably spend, if they were in low/FW, again, they would have a huge gimmick to keep them flying. If they were in sov space, get your anom running ship! Where does that leave NPC null? Some of it has good LP stores, but not all. Take Syndicate, which still has an LP store worse than the HS SoE one. Not only does that not make intuitive sense (why would pirate LP earned in dangerous NPC null be worth less per LP than the same in HI?), it makes the region unable to support new players, when it is exactly the sort of region that new players that do not want a large social or time commitment could thrive in. Putting accessible, available income in places creates content, which creates trade hubs, which create content, which create bigger player organizations, which create content. Belt ratting in lowsec literally earns more than belt ratting in null due to security tags.

There's a lot to be said about SP, ship balancing, UI, etc. Little is being said about making places to live as newbies actually viable and conducive to fun. People want a place where they and a few friends they may be trying the game out with can have an NPC station to live out of, have good income opportunities, and have lots of opportunity for small gang fights. There is too much emphasis on Sov null; its not for everyone.

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?