These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

How to fix eve for new players and increase eve population

First post
Author
ergherhdfgh
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#41 - 2015-08-14 11:26:39 UTC
Dror wrote:
ergherhdfgh wrote:
Yes we know this is limiting the number of people that will play eve and it is limiting the people that frankly I don't want playing the game anyway. If you are looking for easy win- instant gratification gaming then I am glad to see you go back to all those other games and stay out of my glorious and difficult game.


What authority comes with this post, that it gets to say what subs the game and company deserve..

I speak of my own authority and for my own self and never claimed any different.

As for what the Devs think on this topic you can go back and read plenty of dev blogs and watch several fanfest videos that either directly address this question or touch on the subject in some way. My summary of my take on that is that the CCP Devs understand that they have a niche game with a niche audience. They are also aware that they are one of the oldest if not the oldest MMOs out there and this game saw stead growth, granted it was slow but slow steady growth is good, from day one of the game up until the jita riot and that was a result of them trying to leave the niche and become like other MMOs.

I personally feel like they learned their lesson after the jita riots and now will stick more closely to their target audience. However if you dig around you can find dev blogs where they flat out say that they understand Eve is not for everyone. It is a brutal hard core game that many people won't like. But they do have their target audience and hopefully now are catering to it.

Dror wrote:

As for the Suitonia videos, the game is more than PvP; and my previous post explains multiple reasons why low SP is especially negative for gameplay and content, including sov and null.

As for this I am not going back and reading your post. Come back to me when you've been playing this game for a few years and get to be experienced and then have started a fresh alt and play it again with low SP but experience. I've done that as have a lot of other vets and what you realize is t hat low skill points does not hold you back from anything. You are blaming your lack of skill and game knowledge on skill points.

I think this game does an excellent job of giving you skills at a rate that you can effectively take them in and make use of them. Giving them to you any faster won't help your learning curve issue. And if you think this is not true then go buy a high skill point character and watch what happens. These forums are littered with the tears of young players that purchased high skill point characters and still had all the same issues when they though skill points would save them.

In WoW a level 10 character does not stand a chance against a level 100. Literally the level 100 could walk away from his computer and leave his house and go to the movies and his character would not die with the level 10 beating on him. In eve a 2 week old character in a frigate can kill a 10 year old player in a battleship. Also there is no structured 5 v 5 or 40 v 40 PvP in Eve that limits levels and gear score so that all players are of the same level and with similar gear so in your 1000 man fleet fighting sov warfare you'll have to convince me how skill points is keeping you back from enjoying or participating in any kind of game play.

As far as there being more than PvP in this game, I am a total carebear. As someone not interested in PvP I can tell you this most certainly is a PvP focused game and the PvPers and the Devs will tell you the same thing.

Want to talk? Join Cara's channel in game: House Forelli

Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#42 - 2015-08-14 12:17:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Dror
ergherhdfgh wrote:
As for this I am not going back and reading your post.

Then what prerogative do you have to say that it's irrelevant, or that the argument comes from some level of experience?

..As well as implying what the argument actually is?

ergherhdfgh wrote:
..This game does an excellent job of giving you skills at a rate that you can effectively take them in and make use of them. Giving them to you any faster won't help your learning curve issue.

On what grounds? ..That SP-training for months for one ship, class, or playstyle benefits gameplay mastery? Shouldn't fresh musicianship practice with the instrument for getting better?

How quickly this idea is refuted.

"SP is helpful for the game?" Here's all of the research on motivation -- it says the opposite! What purpose does it serve, then? Starter corps are non-competitive. Sov is unchallenged. "Fix sov!" you say? Remove SP.

Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#43 - 2015-08-14 13:54:43 UTC
Avvy wrote:
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:
A newbie with 35M SP is still a newbie, one that has no idea on how to leverage that SP effectively. The current SP system is designed around players learning the nuances of both the ships and the game as they progress.



True, but it would be quicker to learn the game than to train skills to 35 mill from 50k sp.

Here is the question that you did not answer.
If they join up and start losing the expensive ships that high SP would allow them to fly would they stay in the game long enough for their personal skills to catch up and minimize or eliminate those expensive ship losses?
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#44 - 2015-08-14 13:57:04 UTC
Donnachadh wrote:
Here is the question that you did not answer.
If they join up and start losing the expensive ships that high SP would allow them to fly would they stay in the game long enough for their personal skills to catch up and minimize or eliminate those expensive ship losses?

Why is that a question? They'd have to afford the ships first.

"SP is helpful for the game?" Here's all of the research on motivation -- it says the opposite! What purpose does it serve, then? Starter corps are non-competitive. Sov is unchallenged. "Fix sov!" you say? Remove SP.

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#45 - 2015-08-14 19:01:36 UTC
Dror wrote:
Donnachadh wrote:
Here is the question that you did not answer.
If they join up and start losing the expensive ships that high SP would allow them to fly would they stay in the game long enough for their personal skills to catch up and minimize or eliminate those expensive ship losses?

Why is that a question? They'd have to afford the ships first.


I'm sure that would be the next whine thread.

"I have the skills to fly [insert bling boat X here] but I don't have the ISK. New players should start with 1 billion ISK."

Arguments in favor of fun, new players, and player retention would be made. Me? I'd be making and biomassing characters after transfering that ISK to my main and various alts. You think PLEX prices are high now!

Oh, and depending on where that 35 million SP go, making ISK can be stupid easy. I'd put a chunk into PI so I could rake in the ISK there. Roll So, even if they aren't getting the ISK and the SP to jump into [insert bling boat X here] right away, they'd likely be getting into it well before they understood the game's mechanics to fly such boats and not lose them with a hi

"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

Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#46 - 2015-08-14 19:03:01 UTC
Allysa Nar wrote:
I would like to say that I consider myself new to Eve online having played about every other MMO out there. I don't know if this is an appropriate forum to post this, but I know what limits Eve from attracting new players.

There aren't enough ISK doublers in Jita?

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#47 - 2015-08-15 02:56:10 UTC
Dror wrote:
Donnachadh wrote:
Here is the question that you did not answer.
If they join up and start losing the expensive ships that high SP would allow them to fly would they stay in the game long enough for their personal skills to catch up and minimize or eliminate those expensive ship losses?

Why is that a question? They'd have to afford the ships first.

Wondering what EvE you play because in the one I am in players like this simply convert real cash money into ISK by buying plex, no doubt some of them probably convert cash directly into ISK through various sources around the internet.
If you have never heard of plex before or how one can legally acquire them from outside the game then I suggest you do a little research on it before posting stuff like this.
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#48 - 2015-08-15 03:18:16 UTC
Donnachadh wrote:
Players like this simply convert real cash money into ISK by buying plex

Not sure how relevant the idea is, that every character benefiting from increased starting SP purchases PLEX for the ISK experience.

The point is that making enough for ships is sorta inherent with gameplay -- figuring out the economy in a game is progression, which comes from motivation, which comes from competence, autonomy, and relatedness.

So does SP promote competence? It's already stated, then acknowledged, that learning the the game is "much quicker" than training 35M SP; so if SP undermines competence, then it also undermines the psychological rewards (well-being, relatedness..) that are being studied as natural progression. In other words, subs are an SP problem because the game seeming fun is an SP problem. Autonomy is already established by how fantastic flying powerful ships is.

"SP is helpful for the game?" Here's all of the research on motivation -- it says the opposite! What purpose does it serve, then? Starter corps are non-competitive. Sov is unchallenged. "Fix sov!" you say? Remove SP.

Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#49 - 2015-08-15 13:41:12 UTC
Dror wrote:
In other words, subs are an SP problem because the game seeming fun is an SP problem. Autonomy is already established by how fantastic flying powerful ships is.

We are not all that far apart on this. We both agree that SP and ISK can be crucial issues to retention of new players in this game.
Where we differ is at what level these interconnected factors need to be set for those new players.

35 million SP for a first day character is not just a bad idea it is ******** as is the current starting level.

CCP tried to balance this by adding bonus re-maps and that was the wrong way to go as well since new character skills train so fast the remaps are for all practical purposes irrelevant for the first 2 months or so at least.

So where is the proper balance for a new character?
Personally I would like to see CCp remove the bonus remaps and other gimmicks they have tried to ease the SP issue and start new character with an already trained solid set of basic skills. So I guess that would open up a debate on what would be a solid set of basic skills.
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#50 - 2015-08-15 14:08:10 UTC
Donnachadh wrote:
So where is the proper balance for a new character?
Personally I would like to see CCP remove the bonus remaps and other gimmicks they have tried to ease the SP issue and start new character with an already trained solid set of basic skills. So I guess that would open up a debate on what would be a solid set of basic skills.

Why not 35M? Protip, a game like Star Citizen won't have SP limitations at all. Finding the equivalent of an empty Nyx in space won't be limited by "how much that character's been subbed for the game".

Inb4 "but flying skill" -- these ships have autopilot.

"SP is helpful for the game?" Here's all of the research on motivation -- it says the opposite! What purpose does it serve, then? Starter corps are non-competitive. Sov is unchallenged. "Fix sov!" you say? Remove SP.

Zan Shiro
Doomheim
#51 - 2015-08-15 14:39:18 UTC
Dror wrote:


Inb4 "but flying skill" -- these ships have autopilot.


Do not confuse killing rats with killing a real player who has some skill.

Ever engage a player target right click auto orbit?


Let me rephrase...ever engage a smart player target right click auto orbit?


Bad things happen in the latter case. They do a crazy ivan (hard jink), the autopilot goes wonky real fast. Worst case its course correction is a straight 180 degree turn. Smart player takes this chance to rip you a new one and have their way with it. It allows them to close really fast. You are also at virtually 0 traversal.....you get tagged hard.

Or it gives the few seconds for target to warp off.

Worth noting autopilot does this on target hops as well. Test this in pve if you'd like. Line up 5 targets....orbit each one. Kill target 1, set orbit on 2. This flightpath will be anything but smooth and graceful most times. Do this at fleet level ops and your ship will all over the place really. This can be bad...especially if playing in falloff range. Those x-over points can be hair thin. Cross them and watch the damage drop fast.


Manual flight gives the benefit of better range control in changing situations. It can almost be like pool. You aren't thinking sink the 5 ball. You are thinking I hit 5 ball a certain way to drop it and line up the shot to follow from the rebound of the 5 shot.
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#52 - 2015-08-15 15:01:04 UTC
Allysa Nar wrote:
To be honest as a new player all I do anymore is queue my skills. I started my career with other characters doing mining/industrial to generate isk to do other things. Long story short I made tons of isk but my playstyle choices were limited despite having multiple accounts. Ultimately I made mistakes in building all of these as I learned the game.


Claims to be new player, posts about all the non-new player things it's done.

Allysa Nar wrote:
Simply it takes too long to skill up.


No.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff

Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#53 - 2015-08-15 15:30:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Dror
Zan Shiro wrote:
Do not confuse killing rats with killing a real player who has some skill.

Ever engage a player target right click auto orbit?


Let me rephrase...ever engage a smart player target right click auto orbit?


Bad things happen in the latter case. They do a crazy ivan (hard jink), the autopilot goes wonky real fast. Worst case its course correction is a straight 180 degree turn. Smart player takes this chance to rip you a new one and have their way with it. It allows them to close really fast. You are also at virtually 0 traversal.....you get tagged hard.

Or it gives the few seconds for target to warp off.

Worth noting autopilot does this on target hops as well. Test this in pve if you'd like. Line up 5 targets....orbit each one. Kill target 1, set orbit on 2. This flightpath will be anything but smooth and graceful most times. Do this at fleet level ops and your ship will all over the place really. This can be bad...especially if playing in falloff range. Those x-over points can be hair thin. Cross them and watch the damage drop fast.


Manual flight gives the benefit of better range control in changing situations. It can almost be like pool. You aren't thinking sink the 5 ball. You are thinking I hit 5 ball a certain way to drop it and line up the shot to follow from the rebound of the 5 shot.


None of this is relevant with how SP limits finding an empty, expensive ship in space and finding the inability of getting in it. Yet standard overview-commands plausibly being a form of autopilot is an interesting idea.

..Nor does the efficiency of manual-piloting / other piloting information seem relevant for the level of sustain with fresh subs. There's plenty of readiness for developing skill with trying a game, but what posts are mentioning is that SP undermines the natural progression of gameplay and learning. The undermining of learning is shown in studies as promoting "aggressive" behavior, because it's not fulfilling development..

"SP is helpful for the game?" Here's all of the research on motivation -- it says the opposite! What purpose does it serve, then? Starter corps are non-competitive. Sov is unchallenged. "Fix sov!" you say? Remove SP.

Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
#54 - 2015-08-15 21:38:45 UTC
This comes up time and time again. If you make a game so you have all the fun and all the content RIGHT NOW, well why bother playing tomorrow? That game is just another FPS or whatever.

You want fast to play and win, well there are lots of pay to win MMOs out there. And well once you even take away the pay bit and its just click to win, well there are facebook games for that.

If your to immature to enjoy the journey as well as the destination. Your to immature for eve.

AKA the scientist.

Death and Glory!

Well fun is also good.

Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#55 - 2015-08-15 22:15:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonah Gravenstein
Dror wrote:
Donnachadh wrote:
So where is the proper balance for a new character?
Personally I would like to see CCP remove the bonus remaps and other gimmicks they have tried to ease the SP issue and start new character with an already trained solid set of basic skills. So I guess that would open up a debate on what would be a solid set of basic skills.

Why not 35M? Protip, a game like Star Citizen won't have SP limitations at all. Finding the equivalent of an empty Nyx in space won't be limited by "how much that character's been subbed for the game".

Inb4 "but flying skill" -- these ships have autopilot.
Do not confuse Star Citizen with Eve, they only thing that they have in common is the underlying theme. Star Citizen has more in common with SWG than it does Eve, and it's certainly not aimed at the same demographic.

TL;DR CCP are unlikely to ruin and kill their game in order to make WoW in space. They're not looking to be players in the mass market, they seem to like making a challenging, unique, game and being leaders in a niche market.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack

Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#56 - 2015-08-15 22:32:25 UTC
Delt0r Garsk wrote:
..Have all the fun and all the content RIGHT NOW, well why bother playing? The game is just another FPS or whatever.

The main FPS games get an incredible amount of concurrent players, from 500k+. "Why are those games worth playing?" Obviously there's more, for greater levels of instant gratification, than would immediately seem. It's already mentioned that feelings of competence are the basis of motivation, with other progresses. If it seems like the game is undermining progress, that's a problem.

"SP is helpful for the game?" Here's all of the research on motivation -- it says the opposite! What purpose does it serve, then? Starter corps are non-competitive. Sov is unchallenged. "Fix sov!" you say? Remove SP.

Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
#57 - 2015-08-17 08:27:25 UTC
Dror wrote:
Delt0r Garsk wrote:
..Have all the fun and all the content RIGHT NOW, well why bother playing? The game is just another FPS or whatever.

The main FPS games get an incredible amount of concurrent players, from 500k+. "Why are those games worth playing?" Obviously there's more, for greater levels of instant gratification, than would immediately seem. It's already mentioned that feelings of competence are the basis of motivation, with other progresses. If it seems like the game is undermining progress, that's a problem.

Did you deliberately misquote me? FPS have servers the size of 16-100 players max. And nobody plays the same one for much more than a year. Not the same as a MMO at all. Not even in the same galaxy.

AKA the scientist.

Death and Glory!

Well fun is also good.

Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#58 - 2015-08-17 12:00:37 UTC
Delt0r Garsk wrote:
Did you deliberately misquote me? FPS have servers the size of 16-100 players max. And nobody plays the same one for much more than a year. Not the same as a MMO at all. Not even in the same galaxy.

CS:GO release date: August 21, 2012..

Is there any rebuttal that SP undermines competence and relatedness? It's an MMO, and one that can thrive solely on skill and socialization; so it's pretty awful design that the main form of progression is non-progression -- non-interactivity -- that also negatively effects industry availability, causes an N+1 and SP+1 problem from limited corp progression, and thus reduces veteran content completely.

"SP is helpful for the game?" Here's all of the research on motivation -- it says the opposite! What purpose does it serve, then? Starter corps are non-competitive. Sov is unchallenged. "Fix sov!" you say? Remove SP.

Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#59 - 2015-08-17 12:23:18 UTC
Progression has worked so well for making players stick with a game for longer that even instant gratification games like COD and BF have adopted level systems.

So eve is a game that can keep all players with skill and socialization, but also keeps players with progression.

Win win.

What is the non-interactivity you refer to?
What is the n+1 sp+1 problem?

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Arla Sarain
#60 - 2015-08-17 12:34:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Arla Sarain
Dror wrote:


ergherhdfgh wrote:
..This game does an excellent job of giving you skills at a rate that you can effectively take them in and make use of them. Giving them to you any faster won't help your learning curve issue.

On what grounds? ..That SP-training for months for one ship, class, or playstyle benefits gameplay mastery? Shouldn't fresh musicianship practice with the instrument for getting better?

How quickly this idea is refuted.

Don't draw parallels to real life.

Earn-as-you-go EXP is agonising because if you miss out on days or weeks of grinding you are left behind the rest of the group or populace. It forces people to play as much as possible and is far more guilty inducing for missing out playtime.

Considering that functional roles require very little in terms of skills and SP, and only extremely specialised roles require high SP, the real-time exp system offers decent gameplay opportunities.

The fault is not the system, but rather than the meta-shift. It is now FAR more valuable to have a broad selection of specialised ships than it was ever before. Which isn't very lenient to newer players.

But by making EXP based on how long you grind, this won't be fixed. And what's gonna happen when people set out to deliberately prevent newbies, who cannot defend themselves, from grinding? Their SP progress will come to a complete standstill. Careful what you ask for.

Current EXP system is far more advantageous since it lets you focus on the game. Not the part before the game.

P.S. What makes you think you wouldn't grind for months to get into a ship if SP was rewarded per grind?