There has been no point where ccp looked at decs and said ‘too many grief decs’. They instead said in 2012 grief decs are not rife like everyone thought they were. They said they were under utilised and lacked commitment from both sides.
They made the change in the rules citing the above but a big part of it was more likely to stop carebear whining, and with the hope of cashing in on more subs.
Unfortunately it didn’t work like they thought it would.
Then in 2018 they looked again at decs and clearly said ‘new players are not the target of wardecs’ or words to that effect. What they saw was that corps that had grown would become the targets of decs. They also saw that the activity of a corp (important distinction) would drop to almost zero after a dec. But that’s because many players would do what you did, leave the corp. They saw that aggressors had stupidly high kill/death ratios and that the majority of wardecs came from just 5 groups.
Ccp and the csm thought this clearly indicated that decs were having a negative effect on retention. And thats when they made structures the focus of decs. Any corp that didn’t have one would be immune to decs and would become ‘social corps’. Thousands of players are now immune to decs and we now get social corps, something we’ve been wanting for ages. Two birds with one stone…
Needless to say, this didn’t work as ccp and the csm expected. Activity went down again, player retention is not up. The primary objective of the wardec nerfs wasn’t just failed, but it had the opposite effect.
Ccp looked at decs afterwards and claimed a ‘victory’ in that wardecs are more utilised. Kills per dec is up. But at no point did ccp say that was what they were trying to do.
They didn’t mention that wardecs are even more focused into fewer groups now or whether the kill/death ratio has become less or more in favour of the aggressors.
The nerf to wardecs has not improved the game by any measurable metric…it has only made the game worse. You’re concentrating your perception on your feelings and personal experiences. You don’t know the dec mechanics.
No. Flat 100m fee now.
Ironically ccp said this made the ‘average dec’ cheaper. Because wardeccers weren’t deccing small corps. They were deccing larger ones.
That’s actually completely the opposite. They said that after a war is finished, the players of the wardecced entity remain at low activity for a long time, and therefore that wardeccing people with no ability to defend themselves actually kills the game - because they just leave the game, not only their corp.
page 12.
CCP Larrikin pulls up activity data for players of corporations that have wars declared against them and it shows considerable activity drops in all activities during the war. They also show that the continues after the war ends. Brisc Rubal noted that the numbers here were so stark, it would justify immediately removing war decs as a mechanic and promising a fix after the fact. The CSM in general were surprised at how stark the numbers were and noted it was clear this mechanic was having a significant impact on player recruitment and retention.
That’s to link to the idea (right or wrong, dunno) that “social bonds” are what make players stick to Eve.
You say that because you misunderstand the state of the game prior to the war change.
And you’re interpreting the words wrongly, to make them fit your feeling and personal experiences.
You seem a bit confused on the wardec mechanics and the effects they have.yourself Daichi.
Seems like the serve little purpose other then to grieve. If I understand that data right almost all are non mutual. I have seen these talented hunters in action. Camping at a station waiting for someone from the corp they wardeced to undock, then pop. That must be fun game play there.
I do like Eve for its dangers even in highsec but the wardec system needs another rework or just dropped out of the game. If it is just killing off active players and not increasing highsec wars then it really needs to go. Or be more specific to mutual combatants.
It’s true that’s a oversight on mine about the players.
But the question is still relevant. Now that all these players are immune to decs, where are they? Why aren’t activity numbers up? Why did activity go down after dec nerfs.
Not true. Improving retention was clearly the purpose of nerfing decs. But it didn’t work.
Aside fron misinterpreting corps vs players everything I’ve been saying is truth.
The irony though when you’ve said this:
Does it say they quit the game? How do you know?
Low activity continues according to the data that wasn’t released. How long? A week? A day? 10 seconds?
If i was adding my opinion I’d be talking about players quitting from boredom is a bigger issue than wardecs. And I’d say wardecs are actually better for retention because it allows for entry level pvp. I’d be saying that the reason activity is going up right now is because the players that quit because of decs are going to quit eve anyways.
And the last one is likely true.
Please quote me where I’m wrong about mechanics.
Show me how nerfing decs has resulted in better player retention.
Playing the game is grief now?
Let’s ignore that wardecs have always been opt-in…right?
On the contrary, nerfing wardecs is killing off players that would actually stick with the game in favour of those who aren’t.
They are absolutely necessary for a game like eve.
Perhaps phrase it another way. Can you show me anything that shows how the wardec nerfs have improved player retention? Or activity? Or anything beyond ‘kills per dec’…
Since you are obviously sitting there and wondering 'why did they make the wardec changes?’
Since activity didn’t improve. Retention didn’t improve. Wardecs are no more spread across more groups…
What does a successful wardec change look like to you?
no.
YOU are claiming that the change was a failure.However you have no data backing that claim. So I ask for “source” , to which you admit you have none.
Your claim that a specific metric of activity of your chosing should improve when the metric of retention used by CCP for the war effect improves, is BS.
Ccp didn’t release any data on activity before or after wardec changes. They talked about it. But never released any.
So i do the best with the data available. Read data available.
Funny that isn’t it.
When ccp release actual data in 2015, you don’t like people referring to it. But when ccp just talk about the general existence of data and not release the data itself its a whole different story for you isn’t it.
No you don’t.
The best in that case, would be to admit you don’t have the data you are talking about, and stop whining because CCP made a change that did not suit your taste.
But it IS a whole different thing. You can’t look at data about cats and use them as data bout dogs.
You just don’t have the data you claim you have. Period.
You claiming otherwise is just lies. Unless of course you provide sources that are actually on the topic - which may exist, I don’t know if the patch was a success or not.
Except that you looked at a different metric.
Therefore your opinion on the topic is worth nothing.
Yes. They are irrelevant, unless proven relevant. As I said, you can’t use data bout cats to talk about dogs.
No I don’t claim it’s not a failure. I only asked for your sources. Which you don’t have.
YOU do make a claim. And YOU don’t have any data to back that claim.
Therefore YOU are spoutting BS.
Especially, CCP was talking about retention for players who were subject to a wardec but not able to defend.
If you talk about anything else, you are out of topic.
