These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Ima GoodGirl
Aria Shi's Wasted ISK
#441 - 2015-08-30 04:38:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Ima GoodGirl
Malt Zedong wrote:

Again, it is not because you cant do what you want with what you have, that nobody does.
You can scan without a scan ship, you can intercept without an interceptor, you can "cruise without a cruiser" (lol).
The question is: Which is better ?

If you cant think of anything a capital ship do better than a sub, then you are a crappy capital pilot. Plain simple.

You can be a goose without a long neck and feathers.

You're posts are a good example of that.

Same sort of logic. That is. Naive and unnecessarily hostile without providing and real examples or anecdotes from experience. Just Someone that has no established credibility on the issue being deliberately confrontational.
Terminal Insanity
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#442 - 2015-08-30 06:39:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Terminal Insanity
ccp should finish Walking-in-Stations and make that part of the game free2play as a way to hook players into the eve experience. just being able to get a taste of the cutthroat pvp and trading would convert a lot of people into paid pilots. The free2play part can be restricted to trading new set of items and new types of pvp. ps: i'd like to see anti-boosters. train Hiding in Shadows up and then inject an enemy pilot with a toxin that gives the opposite effects of a booster drug, for when they undock later. Or maybe a tracking bug so you can track that hauler down after he's left jita.
Take "dont undock if you dont want to die" and add "dont leave your CQ if you dont want to die".

also, sov as we know it needs to change from the ground up. the map shouldnt show 'sov' the way it is now, but instead just what allince is most active in the area. base it on kill:loss ratio in the system maybe? if you want a system to show up as yours, you need to have the most players and/or kills in that system over a prolonged period.

nullsec outposts should be captured by shooting them, breaking them into pieces, and become unusable until someone repairs the parts and makes it habitable again, and whoever made those repairs gets to gain control of the station

also, every time you buff concord or make a change to limit highsec ganks, you're just reaffirming people's false notion that eve is a place where they can safely collect things. Concord did fine 5 years ago and its not doing any better now. you've only forced gankers to work in greater numbers, resulting in ships being destroyeyd a lot faster, and then victims read that as "its too easy to gank in highsec now" and you continue to add to the problem with more concord buffs. stop pandering to them & most of them will man up and enjoy the game for its ruthless nature.

I dont see a giant outcry about scammers really. Sure theres complaints abuot 'annoying scammers' but its not a giant glaring issue the communify faces. Thats becaue everyone has accepted that scamming is legit even if it costs them some isk. Contrast that to how people react to scams in Guildwars, where scamming is illegal. Any little disadvantaged trade becomes a bannable offense and people rat eachother out all day for little ****.

tldr: is, if you cater to the whiners, you'll have nothing but whiners for players. Some whining is legitimate, but most of it is just people not getting their way. Falling down the hole in mario bros sucks, but you know what sucks more? not having any holes at all

"War declarations are never officially considered griefing and are not a bannable offense, and it has been repeatedly stated by the developers that the possibility for non-consensual PvP is an intended feature." - CCP

Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#443 - 2015-08-30 08:14:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
Whitehound wrote:
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
What are you talking about? Spaceships are the mean of playing, but the game haves many themes, as it is purposed to be a sandbox, not a PvP or a PvE game.

So it is multi-themed sandbox game and because it does not offer tacos does it lose players?


It is losing players who are confronted with a poor game experience, which is kept in such poor condition for no reason at all despite it's the most consumed player experience in the sandbox and the one with the largest collective of exclusive followers.

Something is very wrong with a game where players are told to not do what 80% of them do, specially since the chances to not do it are based on random interactions and uninformed decissions.

Enjoying a long tenure in EVE should not be a precious reward for the little 20% who meet the right players, get the right advices/ 3rd party resources/infomation/experiences and do the right things.

Of course, long tenures can be that. This is what they've been since day 1 in EVE Online. And it worked well as long as there was a continuous stream of fresh blood eager to try the game.

But now that stream is drying, and EVE needs to begin retaining more people than before. Doing what worked in the past is conservative, short sighted and cowardly. CCP needs to be adventurous, imaginative and daring.

"What if we attempted to turn solo highsec PvE into a game experience as enjoyable as our beloved holy cow the multiplayer PvP?
"Do you think is possible?"
"Maybe not... But it is necessary, since that's what the vast majority of new players end up doing"
"Dismissed. Let's roll Apochrypha 2.0, now with structures to live within the new space. That worked well in 2009"
"But, what about the 80% who just level up their Ravens?"
"Those? There's always more of those coming. Has been so for years and there is no reason why that should change"
(whispers) "...but it is changing..."

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you

Salvos Rhoska
#444 - 2015-08-30 09:40:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Newborn player stats seems more or less constant for the past year, and every increment inbetween.

http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility

Im at a loss to explain PLEX price increase.

My best guess is apparently multiboxers, who are most probably the largest market segment drop in the last year in terms of accounts, were buying PLEX for RLM for some reason. Arguable whether those constituted care/null bears at what %. Especially in null though, with higher and arguably safer profits, why would they have bought PLEX with RLM in the first place when they are space rich?

Why did the cash PLEX buyers stop?
Who were they?
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#445 - 2015-08-30 10:02:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Newborn player stats seems more or less constant for the past year, and every increment inbetween.

http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility

Im at a loss to explain PLEX price increase.

My best guess is apparently multiboxers, who are most probably the largest market segment drop in the last year in terms of accounts, were buying PLEX for RLM for some reason. Arguable whether those constituted care/null bears at what %. Especially in null though, with higher and arguably safer profits, why would they have bought PLEX with RLM in the first place when they are space rich?

Why did the cash PLEX buyers stop?
Who were they?


Here is their king.

Spent 1.300 $ to bling a CNR, was ganked and then was scammed out of a second CNR equally blinged. As extreme as is his case, the King of Purple Bling haves (or, used to have) lots of minions.

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you

Malt Zedong
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#446 - 2015-08-30 10:19:08 UTC
Ima GoodGirl wrote:
Malt Zedong wrote:

Again, it is not because you cant do what you want with what you have, that nobody does.
You can scan without a scan ship, you can intercept without an interceptor, you can "cruise without a cruiser" (lol).
The question is: Which is better ?

If you cant think of anything a capital ship do better than a sub, then you are a crappy capital pilot. Plain simple.

You can be a goose without a long neck and feathers.

You're posts are a good example of that.

Same sort of logic. That is. Naive and unnecessarily hostile without providing and real examples or anecdotes from experience. Just Someone that has no established credibility on the issue being deliberately confrontational.


Because yours is so relevant and based on valid arguments. Right ?

Because you are "EVE Famous" right ?

And only your pride, once more, says that stating you do something badly is detrimental for you as a person.

Capital Ships do exist for a reason, and they are used on and on in battle. You can see them on CCP channel on YouTube, you can see them on player's channels in YouTube, Twitch, and other gaming websites.

No one needs to brag to be taken into consideration.

There is even a term for your kind of fallacy you call logic, it is called "Argument of Authority, followed by the Argument of Ignorance".

You use the empty argument that I have no authority to say what I say based solely on the fact that said authority is not proven, but the argument itself is not tackeld.

The you use the empty argument that I cant know or cant be trusted to know something I never did because I dont show I did. Which attacks only the person and the ability to say something, but again, never tackels WHAT was said aaswell.

But yeah, I am the one doing it wrong in your view, Which really doesnt mean much.

WorldTradersGuild.Com [WTG] - We are here for the long haul.

Whitehound
#447 - 2015-08-30 10:22:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Whitehound
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
Whitehound wrote:
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
What are you talking about? Spaceships are the mean of playing, but the game haves many themes, as it is purposed to be a sandbox, not a PvP or a PvE game.

So it is multi-themed sandbox game and because it does not offer tacos does it lose players?


It is losing players who are confronted with a poor game experience, which is kept in such poor condition for no reason at all despite it's the most consumed player experience in the sandbox and the one with the largest collective of exclusive followers.
...

This is just an opinion. The game has been like this for a long time however.

The sharp drop in numbers that we have seen now started around June this year, but has also levelled off now. At the same time did the PLEX price jump to 1b ISKs. I do not see this as a coincident. It does not need a degree in psychology to understand that players set themselves limits on how much ISKs they want to spend on a PLEX. So when the price for a PLEX reached the 1b ISKs mark did this signal to many players to stop buying PLEX.

I am sure many will only have given up on their alt accounts, which for many years has been a common practise, but they now will be focusing more on their main account and not simply quit the game.

Do not mistake the online numbers for the number of people who are actively playing the game. Many players have alt accounts, from high-sec trading and hauling alts, to cyno, e-war and logi alts, to cap/super cap alts.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#448 - 2015-08-30 10:33:10 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
Whitehound wrote:
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
What are you talking about? Spaceships are the mean of playing, but the game haves many themes, as it is purposed to be a sandbox, not a PvP or a PvE game.

So it is multi-themed sandbox game and because it does not offer tacos does it lose players?


It is losing players who are confronted with a poor game experience, which is kept in such poor condition for no reason at all despite it's the most consumed player experience in the sandbox and the one with the largest collective of exclusive followers.
...

This is just an opinion. The game has been like this for a long time however.

The sharp drop in numbers that we have seen now started around June this year, but has also levelled off now. At the same time did the PLEX price jump to 1b ISKs. I do not see this as a coincident. It does not need a degree in psychology to understand that players set themselves limits on how much ISKs they want to spend on a PLEX. So when the price for a PLEX reached the 1b ISKs mark did this signal to many players to stop buying PLEX.

I am sure many will only have given up on their alt accounts, which for many years has been a common practise, but they now will be focusing more on their main account and not simply quit the game.

Do not mistake the online numbers for the number of people who are actively playing the game. Many players have alt accounts, from high-sec trading and hauling alts, to cyno, e-war and logi alts, to cap/super cap alts.


Oh come on. This year's PCU average is 30% below that of 2011. Whatever it's going on, it's not seasonal, rather chronical.

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you

Whitehound
#449 - 2015-08-30 10:53:11 UTC
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
Whitehound wrote:
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
Whitehound wrote:
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
What are you talking about? Spaceships are the mean of playing, but the game haves many themes, as it is purposed to be a sandbox, not a PvP or a PvE game.

So it is multi-themed sandbox game and because it does not offer tacos does it lose players?


It is losing players who are confronted with a poor game experience, which is kept in such poor condition for no reason at all despite it's the most consumed player experience in the sandbox and the one with the largest collective of exclusive followers.
...

This is just an opinion. The game has been like this for a long time however.

The sharp drop in numbers that we have seen now started around June this year, but has also levelled off now. At the same time did the PLEX price jump to 1b ISKs. I do not see this as a coincident. It does not need a degree in psychology to understand that players set themselves limits on how much ISKs they want to spend on a PLEX. So when the price for a PLEX reached the 1b ISKs mark did this signal to many players to stop buying PLEX.

I am sure many will only have given up on their alt accounts, which for many years has been a common practise, but they now will be focusing more on their main account and not simply quit the game.

Do not mistake the online numbers for the number of people who are actively playing the game. Many players have alt accounts, from high-sec trading and hauling alts, to cyno, e-war and logi alts, to cap/super cap alts.


Oh come on. This year's PCU average is 30% below that of 2011. Whatever it's going on, it's not seasonal, rather chronical.

In 2011 was the price for a PLEX a third of what it is today.

You could have 3 alt accounts for 1b ISKs/month and each of these alts could make you extra ISKs. Today will 1b ISKs/month only get you one extra account and of course will also make you less ISKs compared to having three alts.

Do you still think the 30% drop you see is much?

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Bagrat Skalski
Koinuun Kotei
#450 - 2015-08-30 11:27:27 UTC
Funny thing, I can do 3 times as much ISK as in 2011, in roughly the same time, but I have done my homework you could say.
Whitehound
#451 - 2015-08-30 11:46:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Whitehound
Bagrat Skalski wrote:
Funny thing, ...

You also should mention that you have started in 2011. Lol

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Salvos Rhoska
#452 - 2015-08-30 12:15:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Whitehound wrote:
It does not need a degree in psychology to understand that players set themselves limits on how much ISKs they want to spend on a PLEX. So when the price for a PLEX reached the 1b ISKs mark did this signal to many players to stop buying PLEX.


It also doesnt need an economics degree, to understand that if isk PLEX buyers left the game, that supply and demand would dictate a reduction in PLEX price, as a factor of reduced demand, rather than an increase as now.

For the second time now, you dont seem to grasp this.

If, as you state, there are less accounts ingame buying PLEX for isk, then demand drops, and so does the price (as controlled statistically against the fact that these players did not buy PLEX into the game, but rather bought it ingame with isk).

This didnt happen, which means the core reasons for PLEX price increase are somewhere else, than in isk PLEXing accounts leaving.
Salvos Rhoska
#453 - 2015-08-30 12:26:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:


Here is their king.

Spent 1.300 $ to bling a CNR, was ganked and then was scammed out of a second CNR equally blinged. As extreme as is his case, the King of Purple Bling haves (or, used to have) lots of minions.


Not to tinfoil hat, but I remember as I read at the time of this, thinking it was a glorious media stunt.

Though its possible this idiot actually existed, I find it far more likely that certain powers that be found it expedient and cheap tp dump some superfluous officer mods that they cant sell, as well as part of their superfluous stock of PLEX, in a media stunt that is far cheaper in terms of ingame accrued isk, than IRL money advertising and promotion for the same result.

It didnt actually cost the instigators 1300+bucks, because inversly there is no legal way to translate isk into real money.
It just cost them ingame isk, which they are drowning in, and have no means to whitewash or translate into real money.

A glorious example of media manipulation and the kind of EVE ingenuity the game and its denizens are famous for.
I o7, but for only 1 second did I not think it was an instigated hoax, especially as I read the "interview".
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#454 - 2015-08-30 12:28:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Alavaria Fera
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:

Why did the cash PLEX buyers stop?
Who were they?

Here is their king.

Spent 1.300 $ to bling a CNR, was ganked and then was scammed out of a second CNR equally blinged. As extreme as is his case, the King of Purple Bling haves (or, used to have) lots of minions.

I take it they went back to wow as suggested by the tmc article name

Salvos Rhoska wrote:
NEspecially in null though, with higher and arguably safer profits, why would they have bought PLEX with RLM in the first place when they are space rich?

So the solution is to beat up null then?

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?

Britney Fears
EVE Corporation 98582134
#455 - 2015-08-30 12:29:46 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


This didnt happen, which means the core reasons for PLEX price increase are somewhere else, than in isk PLEXing accounts leaving.


There is a pink elephant in the room
Salvos Rhoska
#456 - 2015-08-30 12:33:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Britney Fears wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


This didnt happen, which means the core reasons for PLEX price increase are somewhere else, than in isk PLEXing accounts leaving.


There is a pink elephant in the room


Point it out to me.
Whitehound
#457 - 2015-08-30 12:36:41 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
It also doesnt need an economics degree, to understand that if isk PLEX buyers left the game, that supply and demand would dictate a reduction in PLEX price, as a factor of reduced demand, rather than an increase as now. ...

Nevertheless would a degree have helped you, because you do not understand what is meant by demand. Demand is not the same as the number of players.

We now have more demand for PLEX, because it can be used for more (dual skill queues, ship skins, new clothes and remodelling services).

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Salvos Rhoska
#458 - 2015-08-30 12:43:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Alavaria Fera wrote:


Salvos Rhoska wrote:
NEspecially in null though, with higher and arguably safer profits, why would they have bought PLEX with RLM in the first place when they are space rich?

So the solution is to beat up null then?


No, ofc not.

And your reactionary 1 liner flippant rebuttals are becoming a bit tedious and transparent, here and in other threads.

My point was that nullbears are earning enough isk not to have to buy PLEX for money.
That is well and fine, and deserved, and a matter of ingame mechanics discussion.
It also makes nullbears a huge PLEX consumer, who also suffer from increased isk/PLEX prices.

The difference here, is that PLEX is only introduced into the market by real money investment.
I think this is what we should focus on.
Who are the players, and why, that used to bring PLEX into the game, but now no longer do?

Null, least of all, has any impetus to do so, which eliminates them from consideration in large rational part from consideration as to why PLEX isk prices rose. They are space rich enough to want and benefit from cheap PLEX. Makes no sense for them to sabotagetheir own multitraining/accounting from isk.

Even with NS profits, the +25% increase in PLEX will constrain and limit NS multiaccounts/training, proportionally, as much as anyone else who PLEXes in EVE.
Seifer Al'Masy
Mercury Arms Inc.
#459 - 2015-08-30 12:52:40 UTC
TL:DR Who care about numbers. Fun is here to be had! Big smile


Even if the numbers dropped significantly like many "prophets" of Eve say it is, I hardy see Eve dying,

When Eve started back in 2003, there weren't many players around. Was Eve "Not Fun or Dead?" No, in fact, many people left their mark early on, on Eve History.

m0o, EVOL and many other made Eve fun. Times where there wasn't many stuff around. For players to have Battleships it was a hell of thing.

Eve became a game of super powers, large groups, small groups, solo players. We have all kinds of people.
And Eve player base is well know for adapt to game changes.

So, even if Eve numbers drop, I honestly believe that those who stay, will adapt into a new play style.
Maybe the Super power we know today will no longer exists in 2 years from now. Maybe Eve will become a game of small guerrilla style combat.

Maybe the markets will not have the abundance they have now, and maybe small PvP corps will have to mine and build their own stuff, instead of just flying to Jita and get stuff.

Regardless of what lies ahead, I'm sure we will have fun.
And
Salvos Rhoska
#460 - 2015-08-30 12:53:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Whitehound wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
It also doesnt need an economics degree, to understand that if isk PLEX buyers left the game, that supply and demand would dictate a reduction in PLEX price, as a factor of reduced demand, rather than an increase as now. ...

Nevertheless would a degree have helped you, because you do not understand what is meant by demand. Demand is not the same as the number of players.

We now have more demand for PLEX, because it can be used for more (dual skill queues, ship skins, new clothes and remodelling services).


Ill ask you again.

Explain to me, how a reduction in alts/training, (powered by isk PLEX), due to passing 1bil, would not systemically result in a huge reduction in PLEX demand?

These are the accounts that bought PLEX ingame. They populated demand.

You fundamentally fail to understand supply and demand.

The only way your premise works is if those same players also bought IRL PLEX, which doesnt make sense, as we already agree they used ingame isk to buy PLEX instead, and therefore the 1bil hurdle was untenable, and they left the market, therefore reducing demand.

The rational deduction are:
- PLEX supply has reduced, below and beyond that of PLEX demand (even considering account attrition due to multibox rulings, and the now high price of PLEX in isk). Whoever it was that used to buy PLEX with cash, have left the game or no longer do so in very substantial amounts. PLEX influx is no longer matching PLEX demand, by a large margin, in the last months.
OR ( Less feasibly, but not impossible)
-Some ingame entity has finally managed, with extended investment and effort in time, accounts and isk, to reach a position where they can manipulate PLEX, by buying them up and with-holding, tleast in a short window, before PLEX rationalises due to IRL purchases (as the remainder of population cash in on 1bil per PLEX).

The former, relies on player ability to PLEX ingame against the 1bil margin, on one or more accounts. This will be very interesting to see, and constitutes a rationaliztion of the market towards less multi account/training behavior. This is "good", in many ways that I have outlined before.

The latter, should invariably see a gradual, but noticeeable, PLEX dump into the market, as measured against normal players cashing in on 1bil PLEX, which is at +25% in the last year, extremely equitable against current market prices for everything else and consifering EVE inflation. Depends on where their interrst is, and their capacity to profitably buy PLEX off the currently inflated market vs aggregate profit per unit at higher prices when they start to dump.

Altogether, a fascinating period in EVE economic warfare, as conjoined to player behavior.