These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Decline in numbers... starting to turn into RAPID!!!

First post
Author
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#3381 - 2016-01-02 21:07:37 UTC
Gregor Parud wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:



There's a few things CCP should do to change the emphasis on high sec and make low worthwhile.

- move lvl 4 to low, lvl 3 being highest in HS is fine and lvl 4 can be done in smaller more agile ships making it work just fine in low
- move lvl 5 to npc null
- move 4 mineral types that are used for every day production to low only and give each faction one of them. This will create a pull to low which will attract pvp and will result in hybrid groups of both pvp as miners, interaction, activity, pvp opportunities, market opportunities. This would also be an incentive for miners to try their luck in low and be rewarded for it


CCP would score massive bonus points if they'd divide HS into 4 quadrants all separated by a band of low sec systems with multiple entry points. That way trading and transporting actually becomes meaningful, more of a specialisation and the whole "us vs them" of the 4 factions becomes more prevalent. It would make low sec as a concept meaningful, It would also lower the pressure on Jita.


These ideas would have been awesome 10 years ago. Or even more.

These days there are new space themed games that would take those "PvEers" and "soloers" away. They would feel betrayed for taking away the few things left for them to do in hi sec.


No you just want to keep it this way.



I am completely detached from any kind of interest in EvE since about more than one year ago. I don't "want" anything, I am just an observer right now.
sero Hita
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#3382 - 2016-01-02 21:19:18 UTC  |  Edited by: sero Hita
Jill Xelitras wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:


FW in itself is an affront to the sandbox (localised arbitrary rules and game mechanics resulting in massive income silliness), I never liked it for that reason and thus never did it. It needs to be nerfed.



You propose massive changes ! That usually results in tears, starting with me right here Cry

Please don't deprive me of highsec level 4 missions. Nerf their income to hell, but pretty please let me indulge in watching NPCs explode while they fail to break my tank. I know it's as eventful as watching a fireplace, but I do enjoy that sometimes .. for hours.

Then for FW:

There are 3 types of players doing it
- those who just do the missions for the income (the worst type imo. Can't really say they're doing FW ... not as I perceive FW)
- those who are heavily invested in attacking and defending systems.
- those who just do PvP all day long

It's the last 2 types that are actually FW players imo ... and you should try that, because that's where the fun is.



I agree with Jill. There are many of type two and three fw players. Don't suggest to nerf away what is actually working and providing content for a lot of players (myself included), especially if you have not tried it yourself. If you just want to nerf the lvl 4 missions that people farm, then go on with it, I always wondered why they are connected with FW? Seems like bad game design

If you want to remove the plexes (I assume this is what you mean by arbitrary rules) you should really try out FW before you keep advocating for this change. It is a nicer environment for solo players and new players to find enjoyable pvp, as you have a little bit of protection from groups due to the gate. Some of the most fun moments is when you manage to kill the bait before the rest of the group manage to arrive. Or they are new and drop in one at time, and you manage to kill each of them before the next arrives.

"I'm all for pvp, don't get me wrong. I've ganked in Empire, blobed in low sec. Got T-shirts from every which-where.. But to be forced into a pvp confrontation that I didn't want is wrong ccp." RealFlisker

Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#3383 - 2016-01-02 21:23:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Gregor Parud wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Basically EvE right now is between a rock and an hard place.

Time is not kind, those who don't adapt, die.

EvE / CCP could want to adapt and avoid dying, but their playerbase (I see the mindset right in this thread) refuses to change, refuses to adapt to the new ways of gaming.

That's why Valkyrie will exist: to get rid of the barricades that players erect in EvE at the very mention of change, at the very mention of getting to the modern times. They demand their 2003 game to forever stay frozen in time, but doing so one day it'll be over.
On the other side, if CCP strong handed EvE into the future, then those players could quit, causing EvE to die anyway.

So, CCP are in a lose / lose situation with EvE, that's why they are trying to put out new games so much, so to get unshackled and into the future.


That's a whole lot of doom saying.


Back before the 2011 players revolt, I predicted exactly what would happen with EvE subscription rate and even posted a chart anticipating the future.

Back at the time there were other posters, like Akita T, people with a strong background. Those without salami slices before their eyes.

I have funded / pledged hundreds to thousands euros to each sci-fi game out there including EvE, I could play them all since alpha except Project Entropia (space shard).

EvE for the first time is... NOT getting competition (Blink). That is, not a single 0.0 dude nor wardec corps etc. are not going to even notice them.

However, the cash cows of EvE (exactly those PvEers, miners etc. everybody love to hate upon) are getting called away. Called by exactly what they waited so long for: a multiplayer experience but with few of the aggravating factors (beginning with the stigma against them). A missioning system where you actually pilot the ship. An universe you can explore from the surface of the planets upwards and other factors I am sure others have exposed much better than me.

Now, remove the cash cows and look at the online players count plummet and bleed CCPs' pockets.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#3384 - 2016-01-02 22:23:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Gregor Parud
Funny, I did the same in 2008.


Thing is in 2011 there was an actual issue, focus elsewhere resulting in a long standing lack of effort going in EVE itself. That is not the case here, EVE is getting a TON of love, updates and whatnot. Completely different scenario, if you can't see that then you can't be helped.

I look at CCP's jump fatigue changes and I see confidence: "this is the path we've chosen, yes it's going to cost us subs but we're fine with it because in the long run it it'll be better". I look at all the investments, updates, under the hood changes to archaic coding, new ships, UI changes and whatnot and I see a company that knowns DAMN WELL what it's doing, going forward. i may not agree to all the changes they make but when push comes to shove those are details, not overarching clashes of ideas. Would they really implement skill trading then I'd have to reconsider my stance but we'll see how that one pans out.

CCP seems to be FINE with losing some short term subs, a large portion are a direct result of changes they made so they were to be expected. How well a company or game does is NOT directly reflected by how many subs it has. EVE is going to lose players who ultimately weren't really EVE players, some of them will return, some of them won't. That means that CCP has/get to focus on a more sandboxy "true" EVE to make up for that, I don't see the problem. A leaner, meaner CCP making a leaner, meaner EVE.
Jill Xelitras
Xeltec services
#3385 - 2016-01-02 22:29:47 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

EvE for the first time is... NOT getting competition (Blink). That is, not a single 0.0 dude nor wardec corps etc. are not going to even notice them.


Can you explain this sentence ... I reread 3 times and fail to understand.

Do you mean that new games are not competing with the large scale sovereignty part of EvE, but with other parts of EvE's gameplay ? Thus the drain on EvE's subscription base starts in high-sec ...

or did you mean something completely different ?

Don't anger the forum gods.

ISD Buldath:

> I Saw, I came, I Frowned, I locked, I posted, and I left.

Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#3386 - 2016-01-02 22:39:25 UTC
I've stated this before but it seems it has to be spelled out all the time, for people who aren't actually any good at leading or managing a company.

In order for a company to do well long term it has to constantly question its own actions, make sure it hasn't lost its focus and cut dead weight. It is a continuous battle that sucks for the people affected (they might lose their job) but for a company to stay healthy and keep on top of things it has to be done. An important way of achieving that is by being complete fine with having to do exactly that and seeing it for what it is.

CCP and EVE will do fine as long as they don't panic or listen to terrible clown managers who got their business degrees from a milk carton. Atm CCP is making short term bad, long term good decisions which suck short term (duh) but will play out well long term.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#3387 - 2016-01-02 22:40:44 UTC
Jill Xelitras wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

EvE for the first time is... NOT getting competition (Blink). That is, not a single 0.0 dude nor wardec corps etc. are not going to even notice them.


Can you explain this sentence ... I reread 3 times and fail to understand.

Do you mean that new games are not competing with the large scale sovereignty part of EvE, but with other parts of EvE's gameplay ? Thus the drain on EvE's subscription base starts in high-sec ...

or did you mean something completely different ?


Yeah I tried to create some sort of suspence but my self learned English evidently shows issues.

Basically, the new products don't compete vs Eve at what EvE is strong at, but drain away the "herbivores" that populate EvE's fauna. I don't think it's even a planned strategy, it's just the way the new games are, they cater to more "peaceful" / little spare time players and those happen to bring in big cash to CCP.
Jill Xelitras
Xeltec services
#3388 - 2016-01-02 22:47:20 UTC
Gregor Parud wrote:

Thing is in 2011 there was an actual issue, focus elsewhere resulting in a long standing lack of effort going in EVE itself. That is not the case here, EVE is getting a TON of love, updates and whatnot. Completely different scenario, if you can't see that then you can't be helped.


I agree with this. We're far away from the soon(TM) jokes (That's Valve time if you haven't been around for CCPs soon(tm))
I remember the release of FW after 4x 6 month of build up (Kali expansions 1-4 , starting with Revelations I until finally we got Empyrean age with the actual release ...)

Things have changed a lot. Granted the 0.0 change took several expansion too and is not finished yet, but at least CCP has become better at looking after released new content and modifying it as necessary. Back before 2010, stuff was released as is, since there was no time budget in the 6 months expansion schedule to work on content that had just been released.

Don't anger the forum gods.

ISD Buldath:

> I Saw, I came, I Frowned, I locked, I posted, and I left.

Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#3389 - 2016-01-02 22:49:37 UTC
Gregor Parud wrote:
Funny, I did the same in 2008.

Thing is in 2011 there was an actual issue, focus elsewhere resulting in a long standing lack of effort going in EVE itself. That is not the case here, EVE is getting a TON of love, updates and whatnot. Completely different scenario, if you can't see that then you can't be helped.


The most popular expansion to date, has been exactly the "worst", Apocrypha (iirc) shortly followed by other "monster expansions".

These big expansions proved to be very challenging for CCP, they would cause hard to catch issues and bugs, however they were very liked by the playerbase.
CCP switched to a minimalistic approach, made of smooth improvement.

Imo both approaches are wrong, but the first one causes waves of subscriptions when the so called "Jesus expansion" (who called them like that? CCP Falcon?) goes live.

The second instead does not create new, compelling and - why not - flashy new features therefore EvE lost the traditional two new / renew subs waves per year it used to enjoy.

The best approach would be to use the smooth approach but end up creating the compelling and even daring features like in the old times.


Last but not least, the love EvE is getting might not be the love it needs (in the opinion of the subscribers). So, it's true there's no lack of effort but that effort is not appreciated enough to create revenue.
The day EvE will get the love it needs, we'll see the numbers grow again.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#3390 - 2016-01-02 22:56:59 UTC
Jill Xelitras wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:

Thing is in 2011 there was an actual issue, focus elsewhere resulting in a long standing lack of effort going in EVE itself. That is not the case here, EVE is getting a TON of love, updates and whatnot. Completely different scenario, if you can't see that then you can't be helped.


I agree with this. We're far away from the soon(TM) jokes (That's Valve time if you haven't been around for CCPs soon(tm))
I remember the release of FW after 4x 6 month of build up (Kali expansions 1-4 , starting with Revelations I until finally we got Empyrean age with the actual release ...)

Things have changed a lot. Granted the 0.0 change took several expansion too and is not finished yet, but at least CCP has become better at looking after released new content and modifying it as necessary. Back before 2010, stuff was released as is, since there was no time budget in the 6 months expansion schedule to work on content that had just been released.


The 0.0/sov changes are going to take a long time and CCP showed confidence (and understanding) by stating right from the start that it's going to take several iterations, rethinks and whatnot to "solve" 0.0. That's just a realistic stance. They DID wait quite long with the actual changes but as per usual everything is connected to everything else and soc being a massive feature that is connected to just about everything else they had to wait for all kinds of related changes before it made sense to start on sov. Would they have communicated this better then I'm very sure people wouldn't have been so negative about it.

This really is CCP's issue btw, communication or lack thereof. I fully understand the issues and pitfalls that come with giving updates on what you're doing or planning but CCP has to be more on the ball in this regard.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#3391 - 2016-01-02 22:59:46 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
Funny, I did the same in 2008.

Thing is in 2011 there was an actual issue, focus elsewhere resulting in a long standing lack of effort going in EVE itself. That is not the case here, EVE is getting a TON of love, updates and whatnot. Completely different scenario, if you can't see that then you can't be helped.


The most popular expansion to date, has been exactly the "worst", Apocrypha (iirc) shortly followed by other "monster expansions".

These big expansions proved to be very challenging for CCP, they would cause hard to catch issues and bugs, however they were very liked by the playerbase.
CCP switched to a minimalistic approach, made of smooth improvement.

Imo both approaches are wrong, but the first one causes waves of subscriptions when the so called "Jesus expansion" (who called them like that? CCP Falcon?) goes live.

The second instead does not create new, compelling and - why not - flashy new features therefore EvE lost the traditional two new / renew subs waves per year it used to enjoy.

The best approach would be to use the smooth approach but end up creating the compelling and even daring features like in the old times.


Last but not least, the love EvE is getting might not be the love it needs (in the opinion of the subscribers). So, it's true there's no lack of effort but that effort is not appreciated enough to create revenue.
The day EvE will get the love it needs, we'll see the numbers grow again.



Wait a minute, this is a "EVE needs more PVE content" thing in disguise, isn't it? Aaaand we're back at the start.

Nope, sorry. Enjoy SC.
Jill Xelitras
Xeltec services
#3392 - 2016-01-02 23:18:45 UTC
Gregor Parud wrote:

This really is CCP's issue btw, communication or lack thereof. I fully understand the issues and pitfalls that come with giving updates on what you're doing or planning but CCP has to be more on the ball in this regard.


Absolutely.

Hopefully this will change with their newly hired chief customer officer.

Don't anger the forum gods.

ISD Buldath:

> I Saw, I came, I Frowned, I locked, I posted, and I left.

Jill Xelitras
Xeltec services
#3393 - 2016-01-02 23:37:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Jill Xelitras
Gregor Parud wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

These big expansions proved to be very challenging for CCP, they would cause hard to catch issues and bugs, however they were very liked by the playerbase.
CCP switched to a minimalistic approach, made of smooth improvement.

Imo both approaches are wrong, but the first one causes waves of subscriptions when the so called "Jesus expansion" (who called them like that? CCP Falcon?) goes live.

The second instead does not create new, compelling and - why not - flashy new features therefore EvE lost the traditional two new / renew subs waves per year it used to enjoy.

The best approach would be to use the smooth approach but end up creating the compelling and even daring features like in the old times.


Last but not least, the love EvE is getting might not be the love it needs (in the opinion of the subscribers). So, it's true there's no lack of effort but that effort is not appreciated enough to create revenue.
The day EvE will get the love it needs, we'll see the numbers grow again.



Wait a minute, this is a "EVE needs more PVE content" thing in disguise, isn't it? Aaaand we're back at the start.

Nope, sorry. Enjoy SC.


Nah ... Vaerah is just commenting on how some expansions were able to get new players and old players to (re-)subscribe simply on having features that brought something big and new to the game. (edit: and shiny ... as in easily spotted and of perceived value, like gems or gold in RL)

Reiterations on old mechanics are less interesting for non-eve players, but may draw in old players to check out the changes.

That is neither an endorsement for PvE nor for PvP. It's an endorsement to create stuff that's worth reporting in the current game journalism environment. It's an endorsement to grab both non-eveplayers' and eve-player's imagination in the hopes of finding the realization within EvE.

So, while we got wet thinking of how things like BIAB (brain in a box) could improve gameplay, the world outside of EvE didn't care in the least. Project Legion or Valkyrie on the other hand can get many more people interested. And yet we still need the work on systems like BIAB done.

Don't anger the forum gods.

ISD Buldath:

> I Saw, I came, I Frowned, I locked, I posted, and I left.

Vortexo VonBrenner
Doomheim
#3394 - 2016-01-03 00:11:51 UTC
Poddington Bare
Black Mount Industrial
Breakpoint.
#3395 - 2016-01-03 00:34:45 UTC
Vortexo VonBrenner wrote:
Is it dead yet? Did I miss it again?


I was kissing somebody called Eve at New Year.

Or maybe I was performing CPR. Who knows.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#3396 - 2016-01-03 01:56:32 UTC
Poddington Bare wrote:
Vortexo VonBrenner wrote:
Is it dead yet? Did I miss it again?


I was kissing somebody called Eve at New Year.

Or maybe I was performing CPR. Who knows.


You mean requiring CPR after your kissing.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#3397 - 2016-01-03 03:17:30 UTC
Gregor Parud wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
Funny, I did the same in 2008.

Thing is in 2011 there was an actual issue, focus elsewhere resulting in a long standing lack of effort going in EVE itself. That is not the case here, EVE is getting a TON of love, updates and whatnot. Completely different scenario, if you can't see that then you can't be helped.


The most popular expansion to date, has been exactly the "worst", Apocrypha (iirc) shortly followed by other "monster expansions".

These big expansions proved to be very challenging for CCP, they would cause hard to catch issues and bugs, however they were very liked by the playerbase.
CCP switched to a minimalistic approach, made of smooth improvement.

Imo both approaches are wrong, but the first one causes waves of subscriptions when the so called "Jesus expansion" (who called them like that? CCP Falcon?) goes live.

The second instead does not create new, compelling and - why not - flashy new features therefore EvE lost the traditional two new / renew subs waves per year it used to enjoy.

The best approach would be to use the smooth approach but end up creating the compelling and even daring features like in the old times.


Last but not least, the love EvE is getting might not be the love it needs (in the opinion of the subscribers). So, it's true there's no lack of effort but that effort is not appreciated enough to create revenue.
The day EvE will get the love it needs, we'll see the numbers grow again.



Wait a minute, this is a "EVE needs more PVE content" thing in disguise, isn't it? Aaaand we're back at the start.

Nope, sorry. Enjoy SC.



Nope, I suggest you start reading what the others write a bit better. You seem to look everything people write through your own colored glasses.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#3398 - 2016-01-03 04:15:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Gregor Parud
I'm not so sure about that. Also, you're using a whole lot of doom & gloom for someone who has stated to have stopped bothering over a year ago which as emo drama statements go is a big one, so something CCP changed about a year ago you didn't like very much and now you're trying to convince us all of how terrible it all is. What was it, Jump fatigue?

Fact: people keep using the "think of the subs, why don't you just think of the subs" as a weapon to try and convince us/CCP that we just really should look at things your way. Not just you, but there's a lot of other guilty ones

Fact: this whole "CCP is going down, haven't you noticed we're doomed DOOMED" hilarious nonsense is pretty much the same thing. Unless you can give us all proof on this people should probably just stop trying to use it.

It's almost as if you lot are shills trying to push for f2p and p2w, almost.
Dyner
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#3399 - 2016-01-03 04:35:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Dyner
Gregor Parud wrote:
Dyner wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:

It doesn't take an IQ of 140 to realise that if you're part of a really large group, because you joined the biggest group you could find, there's not going to be much fighting or personal input and that it's all going to be very bland.



Might be bland, but at least you won't be getting your ass shot up.


Only if you suck. On top of that: someone might shoot your space pixels in a game about bashing eachother's heads in with space lasers, the horror!


Apologies for not properly clarifying. I should have said "ass shot up all the time". Basically, trying to play the game while Giants walk around; constantly stepping on you.

In short, undock, ~1 minute later dead, repeat. So the small corps seek out pacts with the larger entities in the area. There are fringe cases but for the most part I see smaller corps allying with larger alliances and moving into said alliance's region of space.


Gregor Parud wrote:

It's almost as if you lot are shills trying to push for f2p and p2w, almost.



EVE became p2w the moment they added PLEX.

I will never understand why people label a game "p2w" if you can buy items with cash. But blindly ignore one that allows you to buy an ingame item with real money that can then be sold for ingame currency, which then buys items.
Vertinox
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#3400 - 2016-01-03 06:38:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Vertinox
You now what is odd. I joined a Star Citizen corporation this weekend. Its made of mostly ex-EVE players. Some are still playing but they are waiting for the open Universe to improve before quitting their subs, but many have already.

Once they add proper grouping in the open universe later this month we will most likely start practicing fleet operations.

Most notably most aren't quitting because they had a bad time with EVE. Its the subscription and the fact Star Citizen offers new features.

You know like walking in stations. Multicrewing. Direct control of space ships.

I don't know. Its happening. So who knows what will happen now?