Dev blog: CSM Winter Summit Minutes & changes to election process

(Rivr Luzade) #48

We have the career agents, don’t we?

Less predictability hasn’t really been a big success. How about, instead of focusing on the random/less predictable aspect, the teams concentrate on fun, enjoyable things? And even there you have lots of work to do because even the FOB are only run by a handful of people:

What about more missions, missions that don’t necessitate alts (please don’t give me the “play with friends”!), more actual exploration involving existing features of the game (landmarks, natural phenomena, for instance) and so on? You spent lots of time on RW and FOB that could have been spent on introducing 5 new missions instead, or new anomalies for null sec. There are so many things that you can do, which do not required new AI, complicated reinventions of the wheel, but which would reach lots of players.
Correct me if I am wrong, but Dread Pirate Scarlet was well received by the players. and lots of people run it every day.

(Coralas) #49

We occasionally run level 4s with new players (CAS starter corp), often setting restrictions on ourselves like being all frigate. buzzkill is actually kinda fun that way, but it tanks rewards.

I’m making a personal push to run some fobs this weekend with new players, but it gives you an idea how low the overall enthusiasm is, when only 1 person in a whole starter corp is vocally attempting to get any interest in them - and there is no drive coming from new players themselves to run them.

The fundamental reason that we didn’t do this with resource wars is that simaltaneously you released a permanent increase in the mining characters needed elsewhere (via moon mining), and resource wars seemed to have bad rewards often laced with a negative LP value trap.

Had for example, resource wars output boosters that raised my moon mining output by 10% (with the game designed around this), then my interest in it might have been very different.

(Coralas) #50

The old player and new player retention in that sort of activity is nil - over a 10 year career, I was entertained by the introduction of dread pirate scarlet mission for 40 minutes for example.

CCP does have to advance the state of pve gameplay, even if that effort is hard, and there is no user manual for them to follow.

My oldest character is 10 years old, I’ve run gurista and serpentis anomolies to death, making a supersanctum wouldn’t change it. Most of the reason I wanted to change scenery was to see the another races DED sites.

(Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci) #51

I’m really getting a feeling that the higher-ups in management really are the reason things have been strange for EVE in recent times - not like it’s directly said anywhere, but the whole summit minutes sort of steer me in that direction.

I know much of the talk about it is just worrying and fear-mongering, but if the upper business side of CCP wants to steer EVE in the direction of “all those other games that make TONS of money”, I really would feel reasonable in being worried for the future of this game. EVE has been steadily chugging along for a decade-and-a-half without the design philosophy that EA-style development seems to prioritize: bringing in as much cash as possible before the game dies, just to do the same thing all over again with the next game.

From a business perspective, that might work for things like yearly reskinned FPS games and Battlefront (not even opening that can of worms), but a game as unique as EVE has become really should be handled more delicately. (throw more of that into Nova, I’m sure it would work there lol)

But with all that said, I’ve loved EVE for the 6 years I’ve been playing it, I love it now, & I’m sure I’ll continue to love it - heck, I’m sincerely hoping I can end up working at CCP in the future so I can help it continue to be loved~~

(Steve Ronuken) #52

Mercs aren’t the problem.

There are groups who target ‘defenseless’ corps, specifically for killboard padding. They’re not looking for fights, they’re looking for easy kills.

(yes yes, I know there’s no such thing as a defenseless corp. But you know what I mean)

(Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci) #53

It’s also really fun to see Sort suggest that stuff with the Drifter ship and modules - I’m certainly of the same opinion there - I’m actively working on a whole lineup right now, actually :wink:

(Siegfried Tahl) #54

So, what you’re saying is… it’s more than you can bear?

(Rivr Luzade) #55

Most people still hang out in high sec, mining, trading and running missions. I contest your claims because I very much like to run missions every now and then even after 6 years. When it comes to your retention, that’s your issue. I am still engaged every time I run a DED Blockade or a Minmatar The Assault, for instance, because in big parts because I don’t use super blinged, super effective tools to run these missions, which means I have to pay attention to my ship and modules and can’t just activate weapons or drones and walk away.

Everything that CCP has planned lately aims for fleet activity and hideous player interaction, which is fine if it pays well, but it should never replace activities that you can do on your own. Running missions and just shooting something is an activity that you can run on your own, and that many people do. Neither Burners nor FOBs nor RW or anything with the new AI is something that you can run on your own. You can’t even mine on your own anymore if a FOB spawns in your system. Everything requires that you have to wait, have to ask, have to consider, have to pay attention, have to organize your own time with that of others. This is stupid and does not make the game any more enjoyable. When you can do that sometimes, these compromises are acceptable and can be enjoyable for a limited period of time, but not every single thing you want to do.

More missions (and turn off the god damn Anomic spam!), more anoms (I am not talking about super sanctums necessarily. More anoms with NPC behavior like in the Forlorn Hubs or Gas Havens would already go a long way to create more engagement and challenges without introducing any new AI), more exploration are easy to create.

(gnshadowninja) #56

I agree, there should be some form of protection but with the introduction of injectors there is no such thing as a 'new players", I’ve killed fully fitted Rattlesnakes on one day characters. There is just no way to differ anymore.

The idea of only war dec structure owning corp/alliances is terrible, here is a list of some of the issues we already have with the war system from my experience as a merc.

  • Cloaky warp trick
  • Corp hopping or dropping
  • Neutral orca scooping
  • Reduced scan res
  • No watch list
  • New Agency feature is utter rubbish for finding locate

Now with all these issues someone wants to include that we can only shoot people with structures? Come on… we may aswell all just become gankers.

(Kannibal Kane) #57

I just came back to the game. Now they want to do that crap to wardecs :slight_smile: it is already nerfed to crap. It is CCP nerfs that has created these Trade Hub camping issue in the first place. Bring back watchlist, limit wars to 3 per corp and suddenly you have focused wardecs again.

Sigh… Maybe I should just become alpha and gank.

(Coralas) #58

absolutely none of what you enjoy precludes CCP from making new multiplayer content in a multiplayer game. All that is being pointed out here, is CCP will not make any more money, nor will they ‘save’ EVE if they put resources into new level 4 missions. You aren’t contesting anything, all you are doing is completely missing the point.

(Rivr Luzade) #59

They make certainly more money from something that people use and that is rewarding than from something that no one uses and which is not rewarding (enough for the efforts). Furthermore, considering how “packed” CCP’s schedule seems to be (judging by the minutes), focusing on the multiplayer PVE rubbish, they are very much precluded from creating new things that I enjoy.

(Arrendis) #60

That’s kinda of a double-edged sword. They need things that have high re-play-ability, and when things get predictable, they quickly become dull (you know, the specifically-not-fun-and-enjoyable thing). Sure, there’s plenty of things we enjoy that are totally predictable, but trying to find that sweet spot where CCP can reliably hit dopamine release in their players without stimulating 3 of the 5 senses… that’s tough, and I’m not gonna pretend I’ve got any kind of magic bullet, either. The best suggestion I can think of is a meet-in-the-middle type thing: predictability within a wider range, so things stay fresh without being nuts (or, from the other side, so players can feel comfortable without getting bored).

So, crazy idea for both an ISK sink and a way for new/PvE-focused players to protect themselves without being safe (because we all know, nobody in New Eden is safe if they’re undocked): take the AI for the ‘reinforcements’ for NPC mining fleets, and apply that to a retainable NPC security force.

Ideally, as The Agency moves into having things like the ‘player corps can set up missions in it’ that’s discussed in the minutes, pirate-hunter corps could put their advertisements in there, as well. I mean, long-term, the solution to groups of players that want to pad their killboards is getting other players to shoot them, right? If the bounty system isn’t doing it (and let’s face it, we know it’s not), then maybe improved visibility for ‘you can hire people to shoot those jerks for you’ might help.

(Lord Razpataz) #61

I’ve been arguing and explained several times over the last 2 years that tying wardecs to structures is a bad idea to any CSM that would listen. I failed apparently.
I even put up a fortizar doing wardecs for 6 months without any of my wartargets even looking at it. Eventually the blue merc donut gave it a try, and with that I made my point.

I’m very happy to see wardecs getting some focus, but I’m very afraid of the result.

(Rivr Luzade) #62

That’s something missions achieve more than anything. Compared to the 10 anomalies, there are hundreds of missions. And you can spice them up with rotating triggers in multi-wave missions, you can spice them up with varying objectives in the same mission, and so on. And best of all: You don’t need to laboriously fly around looking for something, which wastes your entire play time.

(mkint) #63

What about the agency so far has led you to the conclusion that it will ever be done in a worthwhile way? CCP has made the crappy agency thing (with its retarded name) with a focus on new players. The problem with training wheels is that when you grow out of them is you’d be an idiot to ever touch them again. ANY other interface would be better for the fantasy features people want to cram into it.

(Arrendis) #64

Sure, but that’s gasp randomizing content. What we have now doesn’t achieve that. Not really. You get a mission, you know who you’re up against. So you know how to tank your [insert non-Drake hull here or just use a damned missioning Drake they’re still stupidly good at it for cheap]. Then you look it up online and you know exactly what you’re up against.

Making it more like what you’re suggesting—procedural generation of the mission elements—is a relatively significant chunk of work, because either they have to get it right all in one go, or they have to introduce all new agents to iterate with, and leave the current ones in to confuse people.

Edit for clarity: If they don’t, then they risk breaking the game while they fix stuff. And worse, they’ll get everyone ignoring their attempt at a fix, which means they’ll show low uptake numbers and maybe abandon the idea. And that will just make things worse because the devs will be frustrated, the players will decide the devs don’t know what they’re doing, and worse, they’ll decide the devs have just half-assed it again without iteration. It’s a dangerous self-fulfilling cycle of discouragement.

The same thing that’s led me to the conclusion that every other part of EVE will eventually be done in a totally awesome way that isn’t Fozziesov or Turtling Up With Citadel Spam While TiDi Rages Outside… boundless optimism and good drugs. :slight_smile:

Seriously, though: CCP wants to get this right. They do. And I don’t know how many developers they have working on this, but each of those developers only has 1 brain. Between us, the playerbase has a grossly unfair advantage in the number of brains we can throw at a problem. So, the more we can spitball ideas and distill them down so the devs don’t have to sift through all the dross, the better our odds of them having good ideas to work on. It’s a ‘help me help you’ situation.

Also, total props for ‘led’. I can’t tell you how annoying it is to see people use ‘lead’ (the metal) as the past tense of ‘lead’ (to guide or command).:wink:

(Makshima Shogo) #65

My thought’s on bringing Eve back to its deserving greatness, linked rather to not cause a huge wall of text.

(mkint) #66

The minutes make it look like everything they are doing with the agency is targeted at week 1 players. Their attempts to force non-rookies to use it by removing functionality is failing miserably. Hence the training wheels analogy. Adding advanced content to the agency would be like putting training wheels on a Harley. Reread the agency sections of the minutes. Every feature asked about to make the agency not suck is responded to with what can be summed up as “that’s not a priority for us. Not even a little bit. In fact, we’ve hidden the existing functionality in it to make it even less useful for more people.” Agency needs to be scrapped and started over by someone who actually plays EVE, because it’s obvious the people working on it never have.

(Yiole Gionglao) #68

Well, it is good that you as a company look to know that people. But it doesn’t explains all the last years when PvE development has been alienated from PvE players according to those PvE players.

Doesn’t explains why “Why don’t they add new missions?” is answered with a new AI instead of, you know, more missions with the good ol’ dumb NPCs, which is a kind of content perfectly suit to what a EVE PvEr expects from PvE:

  • doable in less than an hour login to logout
  • dependable (they’re rewarded each time they do it)
  • rewarding (in any sense: ISK, or fun, or allow socializing, or just allow doing other stuff while they EVE)
  • allow multiple tactics, aka reward creativity (say, try to run a Level 4 in a T2 frigate for the lulz)
  • must be expanded regularly to avoid staleness

All the new PvE content from the last years which players perceive as a failure failed to fulfill two or more of these points.

Take RW: no to the first point, no to the second point, no to the third, no to the fourth and now no to the fifth… they were doomed from the start.

I am one of those players who has spent years (2009 to 2016 as active subcriber and player, 2016 to now as Alpha forumite) trying to voice what me and other players like me think about PvE in EVE. And yet all what we get looks like is designed according to somebody else’s needs.

Maybe we aren’t silent enough. Maybe we aren’t talking enough. But sweet Jesus, CCP is doing a terrible work with PvE. All it has needed for years was more red crosses to shoot at and new reasons to keep shooting them. And that’s precisely and exactly the thing CCP hasn’t done not even with PvErs at the CSM.