Studying causes of customer attrition is in-arguably one of the most important things a company can do.
Not if it’s an attrition out of the player’s own decision, or lack of discernment ingame.
IE:
People who quit over suicide ganking simply arent cut for the environment and burden’s on them to simply wisen the ■■■■ up.
Doesn’t matter what the cause is.
If people are buying less toilet-paper from a company cos they cant figure out how to use their product, thats still a concern for the company.
PS: CODE “permts” are worth less than a sheet of toilet paper, and even more useless.
1 Like
Oh but you see it does matter, to select and prioritize action on the more urgent issues in fact.
If player attrition was about some major gamebreaking bug, then there’d be cause for concern and to study it.
In the case of suicide ganking, minerbumping … it’s been around for as long as the game, and it’s usefulness remains, ie: the sandbox element, the possibility to be a pirate in someone else’s perceived sense of “safety”, and the overall lawlessness contribution to the nature of the game on the long run.
Useless ? That’s your personal opinion then, for all that actually matters…
1 Like
According to CODE stats alone, not to mention other suicide gank orgs, it is a growing phenomenon, and infamous for leading to “leaving EVE” feedback.
Carrier ratting was not a “bug” either.
It was addressed when it became too prevalent, and prompted it to be prioritized.
Thats why there is so much trolling here.
Suicide Gankers dont want CCP to pay attention to the growth of their activities, and their potential influence on player attrition.
2 Likes
In that case, studying also how many of those “Leaving Eve” players eventually come back would amount to a more complete view of the phenomenon as well, and from my experience with the game and its players (10+ years) most of them nearly always do, as no other game provides such an environment. CCP knows that, so ■■■■■■■ with those fundamental core aspects of player choice interaction, they will effectively ■■■■ their own initial vision of the game, and many more people will leave in droves, realizing it’s succumbed to being another themepark environment.
The carrier ratting bug, cannot be referred to a core vision-breaking bug in any way …
3 Likes
Bring it on.
Look forward to seeing if your plan works, and developing countermeasures if it does.
5 Likes
Why do you think CCP should not investigate the growth of suicide ganking and its impact on player/customer attrition?
Why are you asking the question again ? Can’t you read my answers ?
5 Likes
?
I haven’t asked you that question before.
CCP should study/investigate the rate of player attrition from suicide ganking.
And Ive replied to that, saying it wouldn’t ammount to anything conclusive, nor would be cause for any concern, lest they’d want to screw the core aspect of their game.
Now I’ll throw in another question, do you think an infinite 100% safe space should have its place in Eve ?
Well, if you take a look at most of the CODE kills you can see, that they kill miners that doesn’t fit any tank on their ship.
I was facing tons of miners wich mine like that, max yield, zero tank. Is it that hard to take a look at your local? Or make use of the d-scan?
Just add CODE as a Contact with bad standing and if one of those …pilots enter the system, leave the belt. It’s easy as that. My mining Char has never lost a single ship to gankers beacuse i fitted it with tank and was aware of the dangers in HS.
Ganking is just another game mechanic wich seperates EVE from other games, because it show that you are never save in EVE. A friend of mine once told me “You are unsave in EVE the moment you are logging in, because even on stations you can get scammed” and he was right.
9 Likes
How do you know that?
Absolutely not.
Yep this is the ABC of not being an idiot.
Losing a ship to CODE when you are new and don’t yet know the countermeasures you can take to protect yourself in highsec is a rite of passage.
Losing a fourth ship is evidence of complete incompetence.
There’s a reason us CODE pilots or semi-affiliated supporters (like me) never lose our other ships to highsec ganks. And it’s not just because we are blue to CODE - plenty of the Russian gankers don’t care about that. Plus in CODE we don’t let our blues get away with extreme idiocy either.
We use the available tools to protect ourselves in highsec.
4 Likes
The problem with CODE is that they have the mentality of someone who if they want to do something then no one will stop them from doing what ever they want too. No one should have the right to be safe from them at all because they want to believe that the game should be like real life that if someone wants to show up at your house and burn it down then who is anyone to say that they are not allowed to do such a thing.
CODE would never excel in a game such as WoW because such a game has set boundaries to keep players from becoming exactly like what CODE is. Under privileged children who cannot control themselves and think the world should revolve around their wants.
I’m surprised that CODE hasn’t tried to pull the “I’m a Rookie Card” where you shouldn’t be able to start discussions trying to end their ganks or trying to stop their ganks with active game mechanics. Actually CODE does complain as if they are Rookies being attacked by a Veteran PvPer as they always run back to the aspect of a the gank being a game mechanic and that CCP shouldn’t change the environment to what everyone else wants it changed too.
I remember years ago when Miners brought up the same issue about being ganked. Now its the gankers whining about having their lazy method of game play and being allowed to be feed themselves with the wealth of Eve Online gank after gank after gank.
Let’s see CODE, including their leader, Kannibal Kane, leave High Sec for a month and go into Low and Null with the same alts they use to gank with in High Sec. Guaranteed they won’t get very many ganks.
As I said before, the problem isn’t CODE, the problem is sitting in HS and think you are save.
There are some rules wich apply to all EVE players and one is “You are never save”.
If there is a new player, losing his ship to CODE it’s bad, serious, I feel bad for him.
Loosing the second and third ship is somethink that should lead to learning from mistakes.
Loosing more ships and still fly without tank, semi-afk and don’t watch local etc. is just stupid.
Someone who doesn’t learn from mistakes made in the past, won’t have much fun in EVE and it doesn’t matter if they keep mining, fly missions, explore etc.
Making the HS a 100% save place would be a direction I won’t support, or at least I wouldn’t be happy with.
4 Likes
Who are you to come along and determine how safe High Sec should or should not be based on your ganks?
High Sec miners have FOB and local belt pirates to deal with so there is nothing safe about High Sec mining.
By the way FOB and Sansha Pirates are far more deadly than any CODE member will ever be.
There is no argument from CODE saying that they are making High Sec less safe. Its an illusion just like their cause is an illusion, rather, a delusion.
1 Like
Who pays for the battleships?
First, I don’t gank miners, BUT I support the ABILITY to do it, beacuse it’s the main difference between EVE and most of the other MMOs.
Second, belt pirates are much more predictable than a real player.
Third, CODE makes the HS less save, if they won’t, there wouldn’t be threads like this in the forums…
3 Likes
Did not know @Kannibal_Kane was our leader. I for one welcome our new Highsec end-boss overlord.
5 Likes