These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#161 - 2015-09-12 21:57:56 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
The reliance on vet players is not really for sp. Its for game knowledge.

Removing the sp wouldn't do much to make noobs less dependent.

How can a ship be learned if it's behind gating?

"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
#162 - 2015-09-12 23:51:01 UTC
Dror wrote:
Daichi Yamato wrote:
The reliance on vet players is not really for sp. Its for game knowledge.

Removing the sp wouldn't do much to make noobs less dependent.

How can a ship be learned if it's behind gating?


They weren't necessarily talking about flying a specific ship, but about other aspects of the game that are more universal. Roll

"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
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#163 - 2015-09-13 00:16:21 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
They weren't necessarily talking about flying a specific ship, but about other aspects of the game that are more universal.

Yet the whole idea is without basing. They both exist simultaneously, low effectiveness and low experience, but one can be fixed with gameplay. Thus SP reduces gameplay, which reduces overall PCU effectiveness, which causes stale play. As posted, "A group of newbies could learn the game and infiltrate sov with advanced ships." Neither them nor sov is getting that content.

"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.
Djiana Lenar
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#164 - 2015-09-13 02:17:24 UTC
All T1 gun/missle skills to5
All T1 ship hull up to battleship to 5
That would be pretty helpfull
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#165 - 2015-09-13 05:47:37 UTC
Dror wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:
It limits it, not prohibits it.

Playing the game vicariously through others is still not gameplay, nor "content".

Rivr Luzade wrote:
If an option loses appeal just because you need to train a couple of hours, days or a week or two for it, the idea wasn't intersting or great to begin with.

How would that be realized without playing it?


You do not need others to fly around solo in a frigate and fight other people.

Because they stopped playing because they couldn't have what they want instantly. Which in itself is a completely ridiculous expectation as no other game, sandbox, otherwise MMO or singleplayer, offers everything at the very start of the game or very soon after the game started. Not even Minecraft does this as you need to first find certain materials to be able to farm other materials or need to find, explore and dig into certain areas before you can do something new beyond.

--

Djiana Lenar wrote:
All T1 gun/missle skills to5
All T1 ship hull up to battleship to 5
That would be pretty helpfull

And completely over the top and unnecessary. Players are already overwhelmed with what EVE offers at the moment, giving them even more choice will just confuse them even further.

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.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#166 - 2015-09-13 05:55:11 UTC
Dror wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
They weren't necessarily talking about flying a specific ship, but about other aspects of the game that are more universal.

Yet the whole idea is without basing. They both exist simultaneously, low effectiveness and low experience, but one can be fixed with gameplay. Thus SP reduces gameplay, which reduces overall PCU effectiveness, which causes stale play. As posted, "A group of newbies could learn the game and infiltrate sov with advanced ships." Neither them nor sov is getting that content.


The amount of SP does not restrict your ability to learn the other aspects of the game.

And you have in no way addressed the issue of game balance. Unbalancing the game does not fix it, by definition.

"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
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#167 - 2015-09-13 14:22:41 UTC
Dror wrote:
Daichi Yamato wrote:
The reliance on vet players is not really for sp. Its for game knowledge.

Removing the sp wouldn't do much to make noobs less dependent.

How can a ship be learned if it's behind gating?


A vet can tell a noob a battleship is like a cruiser but sacrifices mobility and damage application for brute strength and projection. He can tell them what jobs they are good for and what jobs they are not good for. He can tell them what areas they are restricted from and what equipment they can use.

EFT (and hopefully soon ghost fitting) can tell a new player what they can fit on a battleship and what numbers it can push with such fittings and, with a vet, a new player can theory craft a good fitting for one purpose or another.

No its not perfect knowledge and it will still take some time for a new player to learn the 'feel' of a ship. But learning this way with a vet would be faster and less expensive than being able to fly the ship from day one and ignoring the help of vets.

Reliance on vets is not for SP.

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
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#168 - 2015-09-13 14:50:42 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
You do not need others to fly around solo in a frigate and fight other people.

Yet everything else is prohibited, and frigates have a tiny target selection (especially with low SP).

Rivr Luzade wrote:
Dror wrote:
How would that be realized without playing it?
Because they stopped playing because they couldn't have what they want instantly.

This is both a non-sequitor and quite the projection.

There are games that offer everything from the start. With Minecraft as the example, it even has a creative mode. Yet, if progression is the main point of SP -- that's already existent with the economy and risk. The commonality is that these are playing on realism -- for MC, it's survival and discovery and exploration -- the roleplay of a character in the middle of nowhere. For EvE, the progression setting is the same. Where, then, is the similar option for progression and discovery? It's gated, for apparently no reason. "Why play if it's so limited?" There's no progression reward for playing. The reply is, obviously, that this is great for some demographics, but that's only with the idea that some form of XP system is helpful. How can a game seem interesting if it's unrewarding? How can the reward of flying well-fit and great-meta ships be found if it's gated? Why is it not OK to unsub from that?

Teckos Pech wrote:
And you have in no way addressed the issue of game balance. Unbalancing the game does not fix it, by definition.

That has been answered, and the definition of balance here is non-standard. If there are game mechanic issues with freedom, then they're a simple fix.

Daichi Yamato wrote:
A ship can be learned if it's behind gating through being told and EFT

That's no exclusive for gating. It's possible without such.

How is relying on veteran fleets not relying on veterans for SP?

"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.
Azazel The Misanthrope
Oblivion's Pendulum
Top Tier
#169 - 2015-09-13 21:46:35 UTC
I knew what I wanted to do as soon as I started EVE. I did all of the research involving that and within approximately 2-3 months I was at a very high level at what I did. I was EVEing for a little longer than 1 year when I was invited to join Exodus. On the other hand I am aware of friends that have been EVEing for longer than I have and still don't understand even the base concepts of the game.

Learn about who you want to be in EVE, put time into that, and people will be calling you a hero within short order. It is that possibility that makes it all worth it.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#170 - 2015-09-13 22:52:41 UTC
Dror wrote:


Rivr Luzade wrote:
Dror wrote:
How would that be realized without playing it?
Because they stopped playing because they couldn't have what they want instantly.

This is both a non-sequitor and quite the projection.


It it is a non-sequitor and projection that people stopped playing because they did not get what they wanted instantly, then there goes your argument right down the crapper. You have just spent page after page telling us specifically this is why people are leaving the game. Now, when that does not suit you your turn around and say, "No it is not true."

So which is it? People are quitting because training times are too rough, or they are not? You simply cannot have it both ways, or if you insist, I'll spend every day logging into the forums and reporting all of your future posts in this thread as nothing but trolling.

"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
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#171 - 2015-09-13 23:05:17 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Dror wrote:


Rivr Luzade wrote:
Dror wrote:
How would that be realized without playing it?
Because they stopped playing because they couldn't have what they want instantly.

This is both a non-sequitor and quite the projection.


It it is a non-sequitor and projection that people stopped playing because they did not get what they wanted instantly, then there goes your argument right down the crapper. You have just spent page after page telling us specifically this is why people are leaving the game. Now, when that does not suit you your turn around and say, "No it is not true."

So which is it? People are quitting because training times are too rough, or they are not? You simply cannot have it both ways, or if you insist, I'll spend every day logging into the forums and reporting all of your future posts in this thread as nothing but trolling.

It's a non-sequitor as follows:

"If an option loses appeal just because of (a ludicrous amount) of training, then the idea wasn't interesting enough or great to begin with."

"How would that be realized without playing that option?"

"Because they stopped playing because they couldn't have what they want instantly."

They can realize that the gameplay/playstyles wasn't interesting or great enough without playing? Because they quit?

"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
#172 - 2015-09-14 00:12:45 UTC
Dror wrote:

That's no exclusive for gating. It's possible without such.

How is relying on veteran fleets not relying on veterans for SP?


I didnt say it was exclusive. Youre trying to say noobs depend on vets for their sp. Which is wrong.

Your also saying a noob is better off flying big ships out the box, but theres a long history of ALODs involving bought characters that suggest it is not only more costly to learn the game this way but also more upsetting.

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
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#173 - 2015-09-14 00:35:10 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Dror wrote:

That's no exclusive for gating. It's possible without such.

How is relying on veteran fleets not relying on veterans for SP?


I didnt say it was exclusive. Youre trying to say noobs depend on vets for their sp. Which is wrong.

Your also saying a noob is better off flying big ships out the box, but theres a long history of ALODs involving bought characters that suggest it is not only more costly to learn the game this way but also more upsetting.


"How is relying on veteran fleets not relying on veterans for SP?" With low SP, there are fewer ship, fitting, and effectiveness options. They aren't filling stations with items, because they don't have the skill points. They aren't banding together as freshies and infiltrating sov, because they don't have the effectiveness. How is that not relying on veterans for SP?

"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
#174 - 2015-09-14 01:20:38 UTC
Dror wrote:
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Dror wrote:

That's no exclusive for gating. It's possible without such.

How is relying on veteran fleets not relying on veterans for SP?


I didnt say it was exclusive. Youre trying to say noobs depend on vets for their sp. Which is wrong.

Your also saying a noob is better off flying big ships out the box, but theres a long history of ALODs involving bought characters that suggest it is not only more costly to learn the game this way but also more upsetting.


"How is relying on veteran fleets not relying on veterans for SP?" With low SP, there are fewer ship, fitting, and effectiveness options. They aren't filling stations with items, because they don't have the skill points. They aren't banding together as freshies and infiltrating sov, because they don't have the effectiveness. How is that not relying on veterans for SP?


Either you are being deliberately obtuse or are just..well lets just leave it at that.

Daichi is that the noob is still earning his own SP, but that a noob can rely on more veteran players to help them obtain content and additional game play.

And why is it that you keep insisting that new players have to be competitive with the veterans. That is just daft.

"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
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#175 - 2015-09-14 02:02:47 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Daichi is that the noob is still earning his own SP, but that a noob can rely on more veteran players to help them obtain content and additional game play.

And why is it that you keep insisting that new players have to be competitive with the veterans. That is just daft.

Actually, it's just repeating the same idea, that SP in no way is relied on from veterans, just knowledge. That's inaccurate.

"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
#176 - 2015-09-14 02:32:58 UTC
Dror wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Daichi is that the noob is still earning his own SP, but that a noob can rely on more veteran players to help them obtain content and additional game play.

And why is it that you keep insisting that new players have to be competitive with the veterans. That is just daft.

Actually, it's just repeating the same idea, that SP in no way is relied on from veterans, just knowledge. That's inaccurate.


No it is true. If you think it is false, explain why.

"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
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#177 - 2015-09-14 02:36:33 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
No it is true. If you think it is false, explain why.


Dror wrote:
"How is relying on veteran fleets not relying on veterans for SP?" With low SP, there are fewer ship, fitting, and effectiveness options. They aren't filling stations with items, because they don't have the skill points. They aren't banding together as freshies and infiltrating sov, because they don't have the effectiveness. How is that not relying on veterans for SP?

"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
#178 - 2015-09-14 03:05:54 UTC
Dror wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
No it is true. If you think it is false, explain why.


Dror wrote:
"How is relying on veteran fleets not relying on veterans for SP?" With low SP, there are fewer ship, fitting, and effectiveness options. They aren't filling stations with items, because they don't have the skill points. They aren't banding together as freshies and infiltrating sov, because they don't have the effectiveness. How is that not relying on veterans for SP?


That's the best you got. Roll

"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
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#179 - 2015-09-14 09:24:24 UTC
Dror wrote:


"How is relying on veteran fleets not relying on veterans for SP?" With low SP, there are fewer ship, fitting, and effectiveness options. They aren't filling stations with items, because they don't have the skill points. They aren't banding together as freshies and infiltrating sov, because they don't have the effectiveness. How is that not relying on veterans for SP?


How is it relying on sp? You dont have to be literally flying along side a vet to receive knowledge, that knowledge can be passed on by a one day old alt. And buying equipment off the market does not require sp.

Freshies are infiltrating parts of sov and they have before. And WH's and fw and high sec.

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
Dror
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#180 - 2015-09-14 09:50:58 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Dror wrote:


"How is relying on veteran fleets not relying on veterans for SP?" With low SP, there are fewer ship, fitting, and effectiveness options. They aren't filling stations with items, because they don't have the skill points. They aren't banding together as freshies and infiltrating sov, because they don't have the effectiveness. How is that not relying on veterans for SP?


How is it relying on sp? You dont have to be literally flying along side a vet to receive knowledge, that knowledge can be passed on by a one day old alt. And buying equipment off the market does not require sp.

Freshies are infiltrating parts of sov and they have before. And WH's and fw and high sec.

It's relying on veteran SP, because fleets will be flown with veterans before the SP is gained for supporting a fleet without veterans. Buying equipment off the market for any effectiveness does require SP, lest the items sit in the station.

If the items are sitting in the station, that's the general idea of "SP reduces content".

"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.