These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev Blog: Exploring The Character Bazaar & Skill Trading

First post First post First post
Author
Iowa Banshee
Fenrir Vangard
#5601 - 2015-11-11 22:32:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Iowa Banshee
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Iowa Banshee wrote:



The best way to improve new player retention stats is to have them make friends with other players - Giving them SP or any other free stuff is not going to help them do this.




The best way to improve new player retention is to ensure they can fully enjoy the game even if they don't make friends with other players -since that's exactly what most of new players will do.


You are describing the "40% that subscribe become PVE'rs & leave after 2 years" posted above

Do think they get bored & leave or is there another reason? - a game that feels like work maybe - I don't know

But CCP cannot provide a unlimited supply of fresh & new PvE content unless they follow the expansions route of the WOW type of MMO

EDIT: We are getting off subject - So I should mention that it still stands that TSP does not help the learning experience of new players
Levi Belvar
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#5602 - 2015-11-11 22:44:51 UTC
Iowa Banshee wrote:
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Iowa Banshee wrote:



The best way to improve new player retention stats is to have them make friends with other players - Giving them SP or any other free stuff is not going to help them do this.




The best way to improve new player retention is to ensure they can fully enjoy the game even if they don't make friends with other players -since that's exactly what most of new players will do.


You are describing the "40% that subscribe become PVE'rs & leave after 2 years" posted above

Do think they get bored & leave or is there another reason? - a game that feels like work maybe - I don't know

But CCP cannot provide a unlimited supply of fresh & new PvE content unless they follow the expansions route of the WOW type of MMO

EDIT: We are getting off subject - So I should mention that it still stands that TSP does not help the learning experience of new players

TSP is just a money grab, nothing more nothing less. To say other wise is just insulting there player base.

“Stupidity and wisdom meet in the same centre of sentiment and resolution, in the suffering of human accidents.”

Indahmawar Fazmarai
#5603 - 2015-11-11 23:32:50 UTC
Iowa Banshee wrote:
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Iowa Banshee wrote:



The best way to improve new player retention stats is to have them make friends with other players - Giving them SP or any other free stuff is not going to help them do this.




The best way to improve new player retention is to ensure they can fully enjoy the game even if they don't make friends with other players -since that's exactly what most of new players will do.


You are describing the "40% that subscribe become PVE'rs & leave after 2 years" posted above

Do think they get bored & leave or is there another reason? - a game that feels like work maybe - I don't know

But CCP cannot provide a unlimited supply of fresh & new PvE content unless they follow the expansions route of the WOW type of MMO

EDIT: We are getting off subject - So I should mention that it still stands that TSP does not help the learning experience of new players


CCP could just have provided tools so PvE generated content. So what a player does in PvE matters. So players engaged in PvE can be enablers and instigators to other players.

Maybe, you know, even develop PvE content building tools that weren't a shoddy piece of shitcode from hell, so developing PvE was done like in all other games.

CCP could.

Now they're selling SP since that's what's left for them to earn money...
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#5604 - 2015-11-11 23:37:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
Levi Belvar wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Levi Belvar wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Iowa Banshee wrote:
This is true - if you a willing to spend RL cash over and above the subscription for PLEX@store you will probably be able to do it for SP@Store

OF course if its SP@market it then follows that in game ISK rich players as well as RL rich players can do something a poor subs only player cannot - Does that not disadvantage & discourage players on a lower budget. newbies and the like?
Simple point of distinction.

If not tradable:
- The RL poor and in game poor can't participate.
- The RL poor and in game rich can't participate.
- The RL rich and in game poor can participate.
- The RL rich and in game rich can participate.
-ALWAYS AVAILABLE FROM CCP
- NOT SCAMABLE
-NO CHANCE OF PRICE CHANGE FROM CCP

If tradable:
- The RL poor and in game poor can't participate.
- The RL poor and in game rich can participate.
- The RL rich and in game poor can participate.
- The RL rich and in game rich can participate.
- The RL poor and in game poor can solicit the help of the in game rich to participate.
COULD BE LOST IF MOVING THEM TO / FROM NULL
-SUPPLY AND DEMAND - EASY FOR LARGE ALLIANCE MANIPULATION / AVAILABILITY

So not being tradable is demonstrably more exclusive. Not totally inclusive for those that don't want to make it a goal, but that doesn't seem to be the intent.

You also missed a few things out on the non trade part, Not scammable, No chance of price fluctuation, if your soft enough - not losing them as cargo if your shipping them.
Scammable is better than unavailable.
Price fluctuation is better than unavailable.

The reason they are better is that for a non participant neither has any meaning, and for a participant it simply means more options.

Also why would you ever move it if it can't be traded? Why would it not go directly into your head since it serves no purpose in item form?


Edit: Those should actually probably be added to the list of advantages of being tradable.

Unavailable ???
Don't you understand english or something. if they were only available from CCP direct they would be available to everyone at a set price to redeem, They would never be unavailable. being a redeemed item they have no chance to be lost either if they were per account. This is what i meant about seeing something and twisting to your way of thinking.
If they cannot be traded they are unavailable with in game means.

And as stated either is preferential to being unavailable. Allow me to explicitly add: "with in game effort" since apparently that needs to be spelled out as well.

Do you always go for the most pants on head interpretation of things said to you?

Edit: To your additions, Not scammable isn't a benefit as it's an avenue for even those without in game means to potentially obtain them, removing even cost as a factor for the clever.

No change in price is simply a non change - if they won't change the price of packets why would they change extractors. RL expense is maintained. ANY price in game is still better than none.

Availability/demand - Highly unlikely unless those alliances do something they've never done before, constrain the supply of a resource that literally every character over 5mill SP could produce.

Loss while moving - The only actual "benefit" here, and only if you consider the concept of forced transfers of ownership a bad thing for items in game or think these should be above the rules.
Danmal
TYR.
Exodus.
#5605 - 2015-11-12 01:27:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Danmal
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:

The latest retention data are:

50% of new players never subscribe
40% subscribe and become PvErs; they rarely last longer than 2 years
10% become PvPrs and may stay like forever, usually longer than 4 years.

CCP's solution to that retention problem is to do everythign possible so PvErs become PvPrs. Considering why PvErs stay only 2 years or what could be done about that apparently never was in the plans.

So here we are, on the road to F2P as CCP treats 80% of their subscribers as more or less expendable.


Is there a source for this information? If this were the new player retention, then I think my point of boosting new player retention might be moot, because 50 percent would seem extraordinarily high to me. But in the study I linked earlier (Feng, Brandt, and Saha, 2007) new player retention has been higher than this only for the earliest adopters of EVE (many of whom would have already been users during the beta and known that they would like and subscribe to the game). If this were true, then EVE would gain something around 1000 newbro subscribers per day and grumpycat bittervet retention might be the issue instead. Overall numbers would fix themselves and rebound if they can hang in long enough.
Danmal
TYR.
Exodus.
#5606 - 2015-11-12 01:43:35 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:

I'll say it again; this feature is not aimed at new players, it is aimed at earning CCP more money. If ccp wanted to help new players get into the game faster, they would give them free sp for completing the tutorial, joining their first player corp or upon there third month in the game.


Oh, I am all for that, as are many others. But CCP has been reluctant to do this and only made minor changes (a slight bump in starting SP).

On the economics side, I think CCP actually need to earn more money in order to be(come) profitable (again). That's speculation since they do not (have to) publish their annual report anymore ever since they bought back the bond they once issued. The reason I bring this up is that I think suggesting that CCP are greedy moneygrabbers is mistaken. I believe it to be more about finding a better survival strategy, really.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#5607 - 2015-11-12 01:56:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Gregor Parud
There's lot of people spouting numbers and "facts" that aren't facts. Stop trying so hard, it's not working.

p.s. it's kinda funny how there's a switch of posters ever so often, and trying it a different way. It's almost as if they're alts trying to use a different angle.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#5608 - 2015-11-12 02:01:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Gregor Parud
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
Danmal wrote:
CCP loses north of 75 percent of users in the first month (that was data from 2005


So what, it's a very healthy niche product which by definition means most people won't like it but the ones that do stick around for a long time. Apart from that: 25% retention is hilariously high, have you seen the number dropoff 3 months after any new MMO launch?


According to your logic all programs on TV should be X-factor clones because that's what a lot of people watch. There's already 38 of them but fck it, lets make another one! What if some show isn't at all like that and it proudly stands there having a completely different target audience. Not as huge as the x-clones but it's there, they're quite loyal and... there's no competition so they're doing just fine.

What would you think of someone who wants to watch X-factor clones, then tries that programme for a few months and suddenly demands that it gets changed to yet another x-clone with the reasoning "that's what a lot of people watch dontyouknow". How much of a moron would you think that person is?


The latest retention data are:

50% of new players never subscribe
40% subscribe and become PvErs; they rarely last longer than 2 years
10% become PvPrs and may stay like forever, usually longer than 4 years.

CCP's solution to that retention problem is to do everythign possible so PvErs become PvPrs. Considering why PvErs stay only 2 years or what could be done about that apparently never was in the plans.

So here we are, on the road to F2P as CCP treats 80% of their subscribers as more or less expendable.


There you go again with the drama, also please state your sources.

Even if:

People who grind PVE hardly play a single MMO that long, they move on to the next grind game so EVE still holding them for that long is actually quite good. And then the 10% who remain for more than 4 years (again, assuming those numbers are correct) that's pretty good for a niche product. Show me a recent MMO that has those stats.

You keep spouting those numbers as if they're bad, they're not. They're actually really good. And your end conclusion on F2P is just as silly and mistaken as your assessment of those numbers. It's not like your agenda is showing or anything.
Iowa Banshee
Fenrir Vangard
#5609 - 2015-11-12 04:43:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Iowa Banshee
Gregor Parud wrote:
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
Danmal wrote:
CCP loses north of 75 percent of users in the first month (that was data from 2005


So what, it's a very healthy niche product which by definition means most people won't like it but the ones that do stick around for a long time. Apart from that: 25% retention is hilariously high, have you seen the number dropoff 3 months after any new MMO launch?


According to your logic all programs on TV should be X-factor clones because that's what a lot of people watch. There's already 38 of them but fck it, lets make another one! What if some show isn't at all like that and it proudly stands there having a completely different target audience. Not as huge as the x-clones but it's there, they're quite loyal and... there's no competition so they're doing just fine.

What would you think of someone who wants to watch X-factor clones, then tries that programme for a few months and suddenly demands that it gets changed to yet another x-clone with the reasoning "that's what a lot of people watch dontyouknow". How much of a moron would you think that person is?


The latest retention data are:

50% of new players never subscribe
40% subscribe and become PvErs; they rarely last longer than 2 years
10% become PvPrs and may stay like forever, usually longer than 4 years.

CCP's solution to that retention problem is to do everythign possible so PvErs become PvPrs. Considering why PvErs stay only 2 years or what could be done about that apparently never was in the plans.

So here we are, on the road to F2P as CCP treats 80% of their subscribers as more or less expendable.


There you go again with the drama, also please state your sources.

Even if:

People who grind PVE hardly play a single MMO that long, they move on to the next grind game so EVE still holding them for that long is actually quite good. And then the 10% who remain for more than 4 years (again, assuming those numbers are correct) that's pretty good for a niche product. Show me a recent MMO that has those stats.

You keep spouting those numbers as if they're bad, they're not. They're actually really good. And your end conclusion on F2P is just as silly and mistaken as your assessment of those numbers. It's not like your agenda is showing or anything.


Here's some figures
This is data for the Free to Play financial model - if you're empire building you had better get the tools to get young players into the best equipment quickly as the drop-off/churn is highest on F2P

https://www.superdataresearch.com/blog/understanding-mmo-retention/?mc_cid=a656805038&mc_eid=f824e1e64e
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#5610 - 2015-11-12 05:43:48 UTC
Danmal wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:

I'll say it again; this feature is not aimed at new players, it is aimed at earning CCP more money. If ccp wanted to help new players get into the game faster, they would give them free sp for completing the tutorial, joining their first player corp or upon there third month in the game.


Oh, I am all for that, as are many others. But CCP has been reluctant to do this and only made minor changes (a slight bump in starting SP).

On the economics side, I think CCP actually need to earn more money in order to be(come) profitable (again). That's speculation since they do not (have to) publish their annual report anymore ever since they bought back the bond they once issued. The reason I bring this up is that I think suggesting that CCP are greedy moneygrabbers is mistaken. I believe it to be more about finding a better survival strategy, really.


Or CCP could focus on creating a game that centralized on both PVE and PVPers instead of just pure PVPer who whined because everyone is doing PVE. If CCP begins updating Lev 4's for example and fix the empire LP stores then I believe the PCU would make a rebound back up to 2013 levels.
Danmal
TYR.
Exodus.
#5611 - 2015-11-12 05:48:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Danmal
Found the source. The 50 percent is for players that already have an initial subscription post trial: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbHqFgn4SOw&feature=youtu.be&t=16m24s Note that Rise speaks about the retention of players who already have a subscription, not about players converting from the trial into a subscription, which I think is a lot lower. See also: http://jestertrek.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-seven-percent-solution.html

Based on data from 2009/2010, you can estimate the rate of trials converting to subscriptions to be somewhere in the range of 5 to 10 percent. Today it is probably lower. In a time when trials go down (see eve-offline.net), improving the conversion rate is one way to get more new people to play EVE (the other of course being to try and boost trials themselves).

All I am suggesting is that allowing pilots to be functional as of the conversion of their trial is something that would probably be beneficial to EVE. Personally, I would prefer they just handed SP to the trial converters (that prospect might also get trialists to convert faster). As CCP have been reluctant to put newbros in this place right away, they might as well throw it in with the trial conversion (and increase the price of the conversion, which costs $5 anyway for nothing in return at all if I understand it correctly). And it would in some sense be consistent with your theory of effort, because now the individual has taken the effort (or commitment) to go from trial to subscription.

Gregor Parud wrote:
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
Danmal wrote:
CCP loses north of 75 percent of users in the first month (that was data from 2005


So what, it's a very healthy niche product which by definition means most people won't like it but the ones that do stick around for a long time. Apart from that: 25% retention is hilariously high, have you seen the number dropoff 3 months after any new MMO launch?


According to your logic all programs on TV should be X-factor clones because that's what a lot of people watch. There's already 38 of them but fck it, lets make another one! What if some show isn't at all like that and it proudly stands there having a completely different target audience. Not as huge as the x-clones but it's there, they're quite loyal and... there's no competition so they're doing just fine.

What would you think of someone who wants to watch X-factor clones, then tries that programme for a few months and suddenly demands that it gets changed to yet another x-clone with the reasoning "that's what a lot of people watch dontyouknow". How much of a moron would you think that person is?


The latest retention data are:

50% of new players never subscribe
40% subscribe and become PvErs; they rarely last longer than 2 years
10% become PvPrs and may stay like forever, usually longer than 4 years.

CCP's solution to that retention problem is to do everythign possible so PvErs become PvPrs. Considering why PvErs stay only 2 years or what could be done about that apparently never was in the plans.

So here we are, on the road to F2P as CCP treats 80% of their subscribers as more or less expendable.


There you go again with the drama, also please state your sources.

Even if:

People who grind PVE hardly play a single MMO that long, they move on to the next grind game so EVE still holding them for that long is actually quite good. And then the 10% who remain for more than 4 years (again, assuming those numbers are correct) that's pretty good for a niche product. Show me a recent MMO that has those stats.

You keep spouting those numbers as if they're bad, they're not. They're actually really good. And your end conclusion on F2P is just as silly and mistaken as your assessment of those numbers. It's not like your agenda is showing or anything.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#5612 - 2015-11-12 10:03:22 UTC
Ok, now think of all the sub based MMO's you've ever tried (if your count doesn't get beyond 5 you're lacking so much experience and understanding on MMOs you should probably stay out of this discussion altogether). Of those, how many do you still play after 2 years. I bet you don't get to 40% which means that EVE does, on average, better. It's the same for 4 years and 10%, I BET that you don't still play 10% of all the sub based MMOs you once tried.

EVE's retention numbers are FINE, they're in fact really good. There's nothing wrong with someone, or a majority of people, not liking a product simply because the product isn't aimed at them. This whole "must be liked by more people" is the same hilariously ****** logic as "companies always much grow bigger" nonsense people keep yapping about, guess what brought us the economy crash. Companies that didn't fall for that hype "must expand, lets borrow money to grow!" silliness still did and do fine after 2008, because they didn't fall for idiot logic and kept doing business in a smart way.

EVE is a niche product, always has been, and that's what it should stay because that's the only way it's going to do well. People who cannot understand that logic should stop trying to type :words: in threads like these.
Danmal
TYR.
Exodus.
#5613 - 2015-11-12 12:10:03 UTC
Yes, EVE is niche, and will and should probably stay this way. But ACUs are way down from their peak and with it likely subscriptions. In a high fixed cost business model like a game developer you become unprofitable quickly when you start losing users. This brings with it the implicit question to which you will not address your mind: how do you stay or become again profitable as a company if you have lost/are losing users in a high fixed costs business model. What you call "hilariously ****** logic" is an economic necessity, and the question is how to achieve it. There are five ways I can see to achieve it:

i.) increase trials, holding conversion rate constant (although typically I would expect these two to be negatively correlated implying increased trial user acquisition costs
ii.) increase post-trial newbro retention
iii.) increase oldbro retention;
iv.) monetize the user base;
v.) cut costs (which would likely include R&D and people in the case of CCP).

That the retention rate once you have them hooked may be good is one thing. Whether you hook them in the first place is another. But you seem somehow reluctant to accept that a company needs to earn money to survive and thrive. Hence, let me pose this question: if you were CCP and in a position to have to either earn more money or cut costs in one of five ways listed above (or more if you see more), how would you do it?

Gregor Parud wrote:
Ok, now think of all the sub based MMO's you've ever tried (if your count doesn't get beyond 5 you're lacking so much experience and understanding on MMOs you should probably stay out of this discussion altogether). Of those, how many do you still play after 2 years. I bet you don't get to 40% which means that EVE does, on average, better. It's the same for 4 years and 10%, I BET that you don't still play 10% of all the sub based MMOs you once tried.

EVE's retention numbers are FINE, they're in fact really good. There's nothing wrong with someone, or a majority of people, not liking a product simply because the product isn't aimed at them. This whole "must be liked by more people" is the same hilariously ****** logic as "companies always much grow bigger" nonsense people keep yapping about, guess what brought us the economy crash. Companies that didn't fall for that hype "must expand, lets borrow money to grow!" silliness still did and do fine after 2008, because they didn't fall for idiot logic and kept doing business in a smart way.

EVE is a niche product, always has been, and that's what it should stay because that's the only way it's going to do well. People who cannot understand that logic should stop trying to type :words: in threads like these.

Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#5614 - 2015-11-12 14:15:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Gregor Parud
They're losing subs for many reasons:

- pvp minded players slowly stop trusting CCP to keep this a PVP centric game
- newer PVE players who got pulled in start to realise that as a pure PVE game EVE is very limited, they want continued content upgrades
- SOV/0.0 related changes taking too long
- people have less alts due to jump drive changes
- war on botting

EVE was bloated based on the hype that came past Incarnage, EVE's resurgence pulled in many folks, they tried hard to get more new players in regardless of their play style and they lured with PVE and dumbed down mechanics. Those people simply stopped bothering and moved on for various reason, one being that EVE just can't offer what more PVE centric grind/content MMOs can but also because... they just move on to something new.

So we're back to 2009ish PCU, how is that a problem? Does this mean that CCP is going to get in trouble for that with manpower etc, yes it will but frankly I don't see a problem in that. They have a bunch of extra projects and hired a ton of people to make EVE more palatable to the "average player", but I care about EVE not the extra projects and EVE is not meant for the average player so you can cut that away and EVE will do JUST FINE.

They just keeping putting themselves in situations where the obvious short term solution seems to be to butcher the goose that lays the golden eggs. And then they even contemplate doing it....


You pull people in by giving them a clear idea of what they're getting in to, being proud of being niche is good especially so if there's really no competition. You keep them playing by making sure you weren't lying when you did that and uphold the premise and core concepts of the game.
Portmanteau
Iron Krosz
#5615 - 2015-11-12 15:48:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Portmanteau
Danmal wrote:
The reason I bring this up is that I think suggesting that CCP are greedy moneygrabbers is mistaken. I believe it to be more about finding a better survival strategy, really.


Fair point, but let's consider that gaining more subs while not pissing off existing players enough to quit is probably better than implementing a system that will extract more money from players but be poor for new player retention and **** many vets off causing them to consider quitting.

Improvements to the game that bring in new players and make existing players happy but cost nothing more than the sub fee will make more money than fleecing the last few dollars/euros/pounds/yen out of an ever decreasing playerbase.
Levi Belvar
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#5616 - 2015-11-12 17:56:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Levi Belvar
Gregor Parud wrote:
They're losing subs for many reasons:

- pvp minded players slowly stop trusting CCP to keep this a PVP centric game
- newer PVE players who got pulled in start to realise that as a pure PVE game EVE is very limited, they want continued content upgrades
- SOV/0.0 related changes taking too long
- people have less alts due to jump drive changes
- war on botting

EVE was bloated based on the hype that came past Incarnage, EVE's resurgence pulled in many folks, they tried hard to get more new players in regardless of their play style and they lured with PVE and dumbed down mechanics. Those people simply stopped bothering and moved on for various reason, one being that EVE just can't offer what more PVE centric grind/content MMOs can but also because... they just move on to something new.

So we're back to 2009ish PCU, how is that a problem? Does this mean that CCP is going to get in trouble for that with manpower etc, yes it will but frankly I don't see a problem in that. They have a bunch of extra projects and hired a ton of people to make EVE more palatable to the "average player", but I care about EVE not the extra projects and EVE is not meant for the average player so you can cut that away and EVE will do JUST FINE.

They just keeping putting themselves in situations where the obvious short term solution seems to be to butcher the goose that lays the golden eggs. And then they even contemplate doing it....


You pull people in by giving them a clear idea of what they're getting in to, being proud of being niche is good especially so if there's really no competition. You keep them playing by making sure you weren't lying when you did that and uphold the premise and core concepts of the game.

Whilst i agree with most of what you say, EvE was never or can't ever be pure PVP, however small the PVE content maybe it's a transitional barrier for a lot of players and the only thing for others. Without this catchment mechanism you wouldn't have people diversifying into PVP. A game can be based around content created by the developers - But pure PVP content can only be created by the masses.

Games today are created by a principal dev's refer to as " Easy to learn - Harder to master" We don't have that luxury in eve as it doesn't apply anyway you try to fit it.

Our intro to eve, though much improved on doesn't instill a feeling you've achieved anything when you have completed it because the points have already been applied to your character with no effort.
If the NPE was started with your character having zero skill points, In a basic ship and each part rewarded you with skillpoints being automatically added to there respective sections and the modules that are needed being fitted to said ship for the next part your actually seeing what is happening and will gain a sense reward for your effort. It doesn't make any difference what so ever practically, psychologically rewarding though. The same when you reach the end of it , having a bumper reward of say 1 million skill points and have some way of how it could be spent to further a chosen career path or better on subbing their first month give them 1 to 1.5 mill skill points.

You can have change without destroying something, but without diversity things only stagnate. A liitle give and take in the beginning of the eve experience may make alot of difference to how they view continuing there experience further.

“Stupidity and wisdom meet in the same centre of sentiment and resolution, in the suffering of human accidents.”

Iowa Banshee
Fenrir Vangard
#5617 - 2015-11-12 18:54:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Iowa Banshee
I think all this talk of new player experience is a bit of a red herring

Given that 1 plex = 1 x Transneural Skill Extractor (harvests 500K SP) = 1 x Transneural Skill Packet (Gives 500K or less)

Now, Once the extra SP has been burnt off from all the redundant Bot-toons and unwanted skills (?) the market will settle into the farmed value of SP. Unless you have reached the peak of your chosen path in which case you could feasibly farm you main toon without a multiple training cert - the cost of producing these packets would be about:

1 Plex for Multiple Training (1.5 million SP a month training up the cheap books dropped from sites)
3 plex to convert into skill packets

You get the equivalent of 10 days training for the ISK value of about 1.5 PLEX (inc a little markup)

A New player with a few SP already under the belt wanting to get into a Cloaky-Scany-Hacky covert frigate required to join a noob friendly WH corp [Electronics Upgrades, Covert Ops, Astrometric Rangefinding, Astrometrics, Survey, Archaeology & Hacking
Hacking ]

Take little over 30days ($12 subscription) or if you want to do it instantly about $48 over what you are already paying.
That's not new player friendly - Most would wait 30-40days & get put off thinking that it is going to cost more & more to train the bigger & better stuff

I could see most of them being purchased by mid range characters, Those who can afford occasionally to spend the ISK but that's not cash-Plex and the only thing that will do is force the ISK price of PLEX up making players drop 2nd accounts.

With plex inflation one of the goals I've heard most about from new players is PlEXing a 2nd account - That goal gets harder to achieve.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#5618 - 2015-11-12 19:00:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Gregor Parud
Levi Belvar wrote:
Whilst i agree with most of what you say, EvE was never or can't ever be pure PVP



Oh no, never said the game should be 100% PVP, that would be silly, but what has been happening the past few years is that CCP tried to make EVE more mainstream because they wanted more players. The only way to do that is to move away from its niche where the game is very competitive and requires (brain) effort to get stuff done and turn it into something much easier. More protection, more hand holding, easier mechanics.

And they did indeed attracts more players and a few years later these new players start to rally for the stuff they're so used to in other MMOs: P2W, P2Advance, "more pve content", instant lvl 60 characters. A bunch of them are posting in this thread. They're also the players who sit in their massive 0.0 alliances being bored to **** because any personal initiative or thought is just not going to happen. Actual pvpers would break free from that and create some havoc of their own and by doing so create content and enjoy themselves. Instead they just sit there grinding to their next Supercap and creating alts to hide behind, be in CODE and shoot at people who won't shoot back. So PVE itself is fine, it's more about the mind set of the player.

CCP lured in the mainstream player and anyone who has a working brain expected this backlash because EVE simply can't deliver what those are looking for. And in the effort to appease to that type of player they made the game worse for the customers it already had. And now, in a final frantic attempt, they simply look at WOW's account management options and try to copy what they see there: instant lvl 60 char, so they try and translate that to EVE. Buying SP.

The lower PCU is fine. The game doesn't somehow magically become more fun or better to play if we'd have a PCU of 60K instead of the 30 we have atm. People are just using this opportunity to try and gain ground for their hilariously obvious and ****** ideas, using "it would be better for the game" or "we'd have more players" as excuses to try and make their brain farts sound valid.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#5619 - 2015-11-12 19:04:17 UTC
Iowa Banshee wrote:
I think all this talk of new player experience is a bit of a red herring

Given that 1 plex = 1 x Transneural Skill Extractor (harvests 500K SP) = 1 x Transneural Skill Packet (Gives 500K or less)

Now, Once the extra SP has been burnt off from all the redundant Bot-toons and unwanted skills (?) the market will settle into the farmed value of SP. Unless you have reached the peak of your chosen path in which case you could feasibly farm you main toon without a multiple training cert - the cost of producing these packets would be about:

1 Plex for Multiple Training (1.5 million SP a month training up the cheap books dropped from sites)
3 plex to convert into skill packets

You get the equivalent of 10 days training for the ISK value of about 1.5 PLEX (inc a little markup)

A New player with a few SP already under the belt wanting to get into a Cloaky-Scany-Hacky covert frigate required to join a noob friendly WH corp [Electronics Upgrades, Covert Ops, Astrometric Rangefinding, Astrometrics, Survey, Archaeology & Hacking
Hacking ]

Take little over 30days ($12 subscription) or if you want to do it instantly about $48 over what you are already paying.
That's not new player friendly - Most would wait 30-40days & get put off thinking that it is going to cost more & more to train the bigger & better stuff

I could see most of them being purchased by mid range characters, Those who can afford occasionally to spend the ISK but that's not cash-Plex and the only thing that will do is force the ISK price of PLEX up making players drop 2nd accounts.

With plex inflation one of the goals I've heard most about from new players is PlEXing a 2nd account - That goal gets harder to achieve.



You're forgetting about large entities who have so much isk that they don't know what to do with it, they can't cram more people into their fleets so instead they will try and use their buying power to increase the quality of their fleets. And the business you can get from that is a nice side effect...
Levi Belvar
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#5620 - 2015-11-12 19:32:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Levi Belvar
Iowa Banshee wrote:
I think all this talk of new player experience is a bit of a red herring

Given that 1 plex = 1 x Transneural Skill Extractor (harvests 500K SP) = 1 x Transneural Skill Packet (Gives 500K or less)

Now, Once the extra SP has been burnt off from all the redundant Bot-toons and unwanted skills (?) the market will settle into the farmed value of SP. Unless you have reached the peak of your chosen path in which case you could feasibly farm you main toon without a multiple training cert - the cost of producing these packets would be about:

1 Plex for Multiple Training (1.5 million SP a month training up the cheap books dropped from sites)
3 plex to convert into skill packets

You get the equivalent of 10 days training for the ISK value of about 1.5 PLEX (inc a little markup)

A New player with a few SP already under the belt wanting to get into a Cloaky-Scany-Hacky covert frigate required to join a noob friendly WH corp [Electronics Upgrades, Covert Ops, Astrometric Rangefinding, Astrometrics, Survey, Archaeology & Hacking
Hacking ]

Take little over 30days ($12 subscription) or if you want to do it instantly about $48 over what you are already paying.
That's not new player friendly - Most would wait 30-40days & get put off thinking that it is going to cost more & more to train the bigger & better stuff

I could see most of them being purchased by mid range characters, Those who can afford occasionally to spend the ISK but that's not cash-Plex and the only thing that will do is force the ISK price of PLEX up making players drop 2nd accounts.

With plex inflation one of the goals I've heard most about from new players is PlEXing a 2nd account - That goal gets harder to achieve.

We were on about a way to get players interested more / convert from trial, not using the fleece the current player base more approach.
Yours are expensive to aren't they, most are basing figures for 1 plex = 4 TSP / 7.5 days 500k x 4 = 30 days + extractor cost
if thats 1 plex for the extractor to theyre going to be silly money Shocked

“Stupidity and wisdom meet in the same centre of sentiment and resolution, in the suffering of human accidents.”