These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Alphas and F2P Have Failed

Author
Teros Hakomairos
Doomheim
#141 - 2017-03-11 18:07:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Teros Hakomairos
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Teros Hakomairos wrote:
That maybe WAS the case lets say 5 years ago....
But todays "nanny games" that don't let you loose anything show that the market has changed to these type of games......

Like it or not...it' remains fact....

No matter how many "nanny games" there are, there is only one EVE.


Yes and it has to survive by adjusting to the reality not staring at the past......

Beeing wiped out because of doing nothing would be sad......
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#142 - 2017-03-11 18:33:41 UTC
Teros Hakomairos wrote:
Player driven economy....

Nice theory dogma.....

It fails the moment you realize CCP is able to spawn EVERYTHING EVERYWHERE at ANY price they want in masses.....


But they don't. Yes, CCP could wreck the economy, but they haven't.

Quote:
If they want THEY control the price of every producht ingame....that's the bottom line...

They just fear the consequences and the hard work it takes to control the market....


That is not controlling the market, that is destroying it. Price controls have rarely worked, and when they do work it is usually because some other aspect of trying to control the market has failed.

"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

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#143 - 2017-03-11 18:37:48 UTC
Teros Hakomairos wrote:


Your post is flawed because you insist that NEW players WANT PVP......
And prefer to "loose it all in a single blow" to "have fun"....

That maybe WAS the case lets say 5 years ago....
But todays "nanny games" that don't let you loose anything show that the market has changed to these type of games......

Like it or not...it' remains fact....


Yup, at least to varying degrees. If you want to play EVE you are sending a pretty clear indicator: I want PvP. That meas you'll be competing against other players. And this competition can be via the market--e.g. a market trader. As a miner--you are trying to acquire resources vs. letting them go to other players (go to a HS ice belt to see this). Or in the more classic sense of getting in a ship and shooting others in LS or NS. Unless you are here to simply run missions while in an NPC corp in HS, most players are going to be competing with other players and thus engaged in PvP.

"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

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#144 - 2017-03-11 18:41:35 UTC
Teros Hakomairos wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Teros Hakomairos wrote:
That maybe WAS the case lets say 5 years ago....
But todays "nanny games" that don't let you loose anything show that the market has changed to these type of games......

Like it or not...it' remains fact....

No matter how many "nanny games" there are, there is only one EVE.


Yes and it has to survive by adjusting to the reality not staring at the past......

Beeing wiped out because of doing nothing would be sad......


And look the game has become more safe. People like you have clamored for increased safety...and gotten it. And PCU has been declining.

And people like you keep whining for more and more changes to make the game safe. "Just one more nerf...."

People like you wanted war decs to become more expensive. Well you got that, and yet people like you still complain about war decs.

People like you complained about suicide gankers getting insurance payouts for the ships CONCORD blew up. CCP changed that and people still suicide gank. And people like you come back to the forums and whine yet again.

You speak of adaptation, but you fail to realize that the players too adapt and in ways you do not foresee and then you come back asking for more nerfs....and PCU continues to decline.

You don't even pause to consider: maybe the nerfs are the cause of the PCU decline.

"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

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#145 - 2017-03-11 18:50:16 UTC
Teros Hakomairos wrote:

And prefer to "loose it all in a single blow" to "have fun"....


Focusing on just this. If this happens, you are doing it wrong, very, very wrong. The first rule of EVE is never fly what you can't afford to lose. This includes not just the ship and modules, but also the cargo.

So, suppose a player has a billion ISK. The above rule would indicate that this player should not buy and fit a ship where the total cost is 1 billion ISK. That is foolish and imprudent. Buy and fit a 100 or 200 million ISK ship. That way you can afford to lose 10/5 of them before you run out of ISK.

So yes, a freighter pilot putting all of his in game "wealth" in his charon and undocking is take a HUGE risk. Especially if the cargo value of that wealth is over 1 billion ISK. The answer is for the player to NOT do that. Not destroy the very core aspect of the game.

"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

Soel Reit
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#146 - 2017-03-11 18:54:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Soel Reit
i mean!
every time i think at the citadels safe mechanic where, after the citadel blow up, everything inside is delivered somewhere else, without being destroyed LolLolLolLolLolLol

PLS LMAO
carebears SMH
carebears everywhere ShockedShockedShocked


what would have happened to goons if outpost would have been destroyable??? (with all the things/ships inside)
do you think they would have simply left their space without fighting?

maybe Cool
Hakawai
State War Academy
Caldari State
#147 - 2017-03-11 19:31:36 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
And look the game has become more safe. People like you have clamored for increased safety...and gotten it. And PCU has been declining.

And people like you keep whining for more and more changes to make the game safe. "Just one more nerf...."

People like you wanted war decs to become more expensive. Well you got that, and yet people like you still complain about war decs.

People like you complained about suicide gankers getting insurance payouts for the ships CONCORD blew up. CCP changed that and people still suicide gank. And people like you come back to the forums and whine yet again.

You speak of adaptation, but you fail to realize that the players too adapt and in ways you do not foresee and then you come back asking for more nerfs....and PCU continues to decline.

You don't even pause to consider: maybe the nerfs are the cause of the PCU decline.

There's no evidence at all in your post to support either hypothesis ("nerfs good" vs "nerfs bad").

And as several other people have pointed out, it's highly unlikely any single minor matter like wardecs or suicide ganking is a major factor affecting in the number of subscriptions or active players.

Most new players' decisions to stay or leave will be based on their overall impressions of the game as they've experienced it. They'll hope for interesting activities, nice people to play with, limited "dead time", etc. And they will consider their necessarily limited impressions of the parts of the game they haven't directly experienced. Do they expect EVE to be interesting enough in the medium- and long-term to justify continued play?

Pretending it comes down to one or two minor factors is equivalent to suggesting EVE is a simple game ("Farmville in Space" perhaps?). But hardly anyone who finds their way to EVE is so naive. It's well known to be a complex PVP game with a high learning curve. And they enter the game knowing that destroyed ships are lost forever. But there's an important question any sensible person asks when starting any new and time-consuming activity: will it be worth the time it takes?

Wardecs deserve the focus they get not because they dominate the decision process, but because they reinforce the impression (not unjustified) that the game is strongly biased in favor of experienced, high ISK-income, well-connected, high SP players. Wardecs certainly look like CCP deliberately designed them to make it easy for experienced players in combat-effective Corps to make highsec hostile to rookies, before they've had a chance to learn the basics.

It's not a good message for CCP or experienced players to be delivering to rookies.
Senneka
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#148 - 2017-03-11 19:33:36 UTC
Problem Addict wrote:
The availability of information makes the game less enjoyable.

Employment history, API's, Killboards.



I agree to this 100%. All that available info takes away from the mystery, and the unknown is what makes things more interesting. :remove local:

OT, not sure if alpha was a flop or not. For me the real flop is the "maintenance mode" CCP seems to be in for quite some time now.
Austin Blythe
Doomheim
#149 - 2017-03-11 19:48:34 UTC
EVE's had its heyday. There will be no significant growth. The PCU has already been as good as it can get. The game can't be changed significantly - it'll always be a submarine simulator in space with spreadsheets, the interior of your ship and the station beyond your captain's quarters forever a mystery. It's a beautiful antique, you just have to like it for what it is.
Cherry Sulphate
ojingo
#150 - 2017-03-11 20:29:29 UTC
played eve on and off for 11 years or so.
so much hand-wringing these days.
buy some moisturiser, kids.
Soel Reit
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#151 - 2017-03-11 20:36:32 UTC
Cherry Sulphate wrote:
played eve on and off for 11 years or so.
so much hand-wringing these days.
buy some moisturiser, kids.


i will! thanks mom
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#152 - 2017-03-11 20:37:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Hakawai wrote:


Pretending it comes down to one or two minor factors is equivalent to suggesting EVE is a simple game ("Farmville in Space" perhaps?).


Actually, my contention is that you and those like you want to turn the game into farmville in space. Which will not be good.

Further, you and those like you grossly misunderstand things like risk and game mechanics. You assume the latter is what causes the former, and completely remove the player element. All this nonsense about "fun vampires".

Here is what is wrong with your arguments: You are basically arguing that coming here and playing the game "wrong" should be fun. It is like saying playing monopoly as if it were checkers should be fun. If you come to this game and play in an imprudent and foolish manner you are probably not going to have much fun. And trying to change the game for that tiny fraction of players is just dumb.

Edit: And this claim about rookies being the primary target of wardecs is just errant nonsense. The players in war dec corps will go after any target that shows up and they think they can take. Will they blow up a rookie? Probably, are they out hunting rookies specifically or are wardecs a bane to rookies? There is no evidence of that. In fact, killing rookies actually enhances retention of those rookie players. For that there is actual evidence and it has been presented to you a number of times.

"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

Hakawai
State War Academy
Caldari State
#153 - 2017-03-11 20:59:25 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Hakawai wrote:


Pretending it comes down to one or two minor factors is equivalent to suggesting EVE is a simple game ("Farmville in Space" perhaps?).


Actually, my contention is that you and those like you want to turn the game into farmville in space. Which will not be good.

Further, you and those like you grossly misunderstand things like risk and game mechanics. You assume the latter is what causes the former, and completely remove the player element. All this nonsense about "fun vampires".
[...]

I'm used to people here making stuff up to support crazy claims (like your earlier post I replied to), but this is unusual ... you're making stuff up to demonstrate that you have no idea what you're trying to say.

For next time, here's a more efficient solution:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorem_ipsum

Sitting Bull Lakota
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
#154 - 2017-03-11 21:04:15 UTC
Austin Blythe wrote:
EVE's had its heyday. There will be no significant growth. The PCU has already been as good as it can get. The game can't be changed significantly...
But it has changed significantly. It's not just coincidence that the average population has decreased over the past decade as the game has gotten safer.
Here's some examples of CCP approved safety measures that have been added since I've started:
  • Ore Holds
  • Mining Barge hp buffs
  • Native hull resists
  • Orca= Best highsec solo miner
  • Jump ships can't project
  • Greatly increased wardec costs
  • Removal of locator agents via removal of watch list
  • The whole crimewatch and safety settings system
The list just keeps going.
EvE players, clearly, don't want safety. They've been leaving and new players aren't coming in to replace them.
It's not because the current generation coming into online games has too short of an attention span to get into it.
EvE is marketed as the cold, dark dystopian game where choices matter and you're never safe once you undock.
That has become more false over the last 10 years. Compared to 2007 EvE, this game is bland and safe.

Let's try something different!
  • Remove native hull resists
  • Bring back the "cancer" of capital projection
  • Ditch entosis links and let raw numbers rule sov again
  • Remove specialized cargo holds
  • Lock everyones safety to at least yellow, or remove the safety system
  • Change wardec costs a flat 20m/week fee
  • Finally, make all NPC corps, including Starters, vulnerable to wardecs

Reversing "The Safening" will steer the game back towards its ideals. I firmly believe that a more dangerous EvE will see an increase in active players.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#155 - 2017-03-12 00:19:42 UTC
Hakawai wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Hakawai wrote:


Pretending it comes down to one or two minor factors is equivalent to suggesting EVE is a simple game ("Farmville in Space" perhaps?).


Actually, my contention is that you and those like you want to turn the game into farmville in space. Which will not be good.

Further, you and those like you grossly misunderstand things like risk and game mechanics. You assume the latter is what causes the former, and completely remove the player element. All this nonsense about "fun vampires".
[...]

I'm used to people here making stuff up to support crazy claims (like your earlier post I replied to), but this is unusual ... you're making stuff up to demonstrate that you have no idea what you're trying to say.

For next time, here's a more efficient solution:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorem_ipsum



I am making up nothing, when it comes to risk in game you are an ignoramus.

"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

Alexander Maxim
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#156 - 2017-03-12 02:22:09 UTC
Server reset. And I say this as someone who has 10 years into this game. I know many friends who like the new mechanics, but won't play because of the powers that be.

Burn it all. Start from scratch.

I bet that subs would be off the charts.
Tanuki Kittybeta
Ripperoni in Pepperoni
#157 - 2017-03-12 02:29:16 UTC
dunno if this has been said already but the spike in numbers were most likely from players that were interested in a niche game but their mom got scared and was sent to live with their aunty and uncle in bel air.
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#158 - 2017-03-12 02:36:36 UTC
Alexander Maxim wrote:
Server reset. And I say this as someone who has 10 years into this game. I know many friends who like the new mechanics, but won't play because of the powers that be.

Burn it all. Start from scratch.

I bet that subs would be off the charts.


I doubt it - most people get attached to what they have built ingame and planning to build - many many people would leave and never come back - it is something CCP seems to consistently try to ignore with changes. I don't think new player uptake or returnees, etc. would offset the difference and you'd then lose many people who are the ones into this kind of game who help to keep it alive.

The biggest issue I've had when trying to get people I know IRL into the game is (a) them getting ganked not once but multiple times before they've even learnt to walk in the game let alone run (b) lack of "raid" like content which seems to be the in thing at the moment.

On a related note when alphas went live I along with some other veteran players who like myself had been away from the game for a long time found our ships had been moved back to one of the starter stations and we spent quite a bit of time in local chat trying to help newer players but one thing that really stuck out and was commented on by a few was the lack of ways to really engage with a new player in the game (other than ganking them) i.e. there was no easy way to fleet up and start a mission arc or something that offered something to both the new player and a way for the veteran player to get involved.

I know eve is dying is banded around a lot but if current trends progress based on what I've seen with other games player numbers will drop to a critical point in around 2.5-3 years and once it drops to that level the drop in numbers will escalate based on increasingly less ingame activity.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#159 - 2017-03-12 02:59:03 UTC
Alexander Maxim wrote:
Burn it all. Start from scratch.

Twisted

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

Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#160 - 2017-03-12 03:08:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Shae Tadaruwa
Hakawai wrote:
I'm used to people here making stuff up to support crazy claims ...

I guess at least making stuff up to support a crazy claim is a step up from others, who just make crazy claims without any supporting material whatsoever.

Cough...Hakawai posts...cough

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."