How to get more people to play eve

TLDR: Jovian space could be opened up and used to both add new content and revisit and change some of the mechanisms that govern the current EVE sandbox as we know it.

Whether or not to directly impact highsec as part of opening Jovian space is an interesting question, but I think highsec would benefit simply by having a new region available from which new ships, modules, or other resources would be introduced into the game. It may also benefit from increased resource demand if the new content added instability to the existing alliance interaction and increased conflict.

One of the reasons that Iā€™d prefer to shake things up by adding new content rather than fundamentally overhauling all of the existing EVE rules is to try to reduce or avoid all of the bitter arguments weā€™ve seen on this thread. A lot of people have vested interests in the existing system and existing accessible regions of New Eden. However, if nothing changes, then EVE is at risk of stagnating (and some might say itā€™s already there).

Opening up a new region of space would not only add new content but also provide for an area of the game in which some existing mechanisms could be revisited and changed a bit. Using a new, restricted space for this would both help to overcome the objections of players who prefer the existing sandbox and introduce some new mystery and complexity to the game.

To illustrate this Iā€™d like to further expand on my ideas for opening up Jovian space to players. For purposes of this discussion ā€œJovian spaceā€ includes not just just the Jove Empire as may have been currently discussed or implied by existing EVE lore but also any new related regions that would be associated with opening up Jove space. Here are the core elements Iā€™ve been thinking about:

  1. Jovian space would only be accessible from the current New Eden regions via rare, size-restricted wormholes. Only frigates and destroyers would be allowed through.

  2. New resources would be introduced via Jovian space that could include new ship BPCs, ship modules, new minerals or other materials required for their construction, etc. These could be transported back to existing EVE regions to impact gameplay there, but the wormhole size restrictions would create limits as well as logistical challenges in doing so. Modules and BPCs would be the easiest to transport, but the BPCs would require some materials that are only available in Jovian space.

  3. Jovian space would include a variety of systems and regions:

  • Wormhole systems that are largely separated from existing wormhole space. They may have Sleeper sites but could also include new sites with different content and different lore.

  • Pockets of stargate-connected systems of varying sizes, with or without any NPC control, and somewhat different security classifications available with nullsec rules being the default absent a sufficiently powerful NPC presence. These pockets would be systems with stargates that are either currently maintained by a controlling NPC or are systems that used to have NPC control and have since been abandoned.

  • The stargate-connected pockets would only be connected via wormholes. The wormholes would work the same as existing wormholes for the most part, but they would be a mostly separate space. They would mostly connect to Jovian space rather than existing regions in New Eden. They may also have more varied ship size restrictions, mass limits, or time restrictions (possibly as short as 4-12 hours).

  • Some sample pocket sizes for stargate-connected systems and some possible associated characteristics:
    2-5 systems: Nullsec security with either no NPC control or perhaps only rarely.
    10-20 systems: Nullsec security in most cases, with perhaps 25-50% NPC control; a few instances of largely lowsec-equivalent security.
    30-50 systems: These would be uncommon and thus valuable regions to gain access to. Perhaps 50% or so would have NPC control. Security would be nullsec in majority of cases, but some more powerful NPCs may impose lowsec conditions in some or perhaps all of the pocket's systems. A small few may impose a quasi-high-sec security system in part of the pocket but with different mechanics (explained below).
    80-100+ systems: These would occur only rarely and either most or all would probably have NPC control. Security would vary from nullsec to a quasi-high-sec, and probably vary throughout the pocket if not all nullsec.

  • Quasi-high-sec security: Given that Jovian space would represent a new region with a different lore and history, there is no reason to think that system security would work exactly the same as existing New Eden regions. However, a small number of NPC empires may have established a security system that offers some of the stability of existing high-sec systems but with different mechanics. Iā€™m proposing that a more relaxed version of ā€œhigh-secā€ be created in these cases in which a player who violates the security rules has their ship impounded rather than being destroyed on the spot. The minimum hold period would be 24 hours but perhaps range as high as a week. To get their ship and its contents released, a fee would have to be paid, perhaps within a range of 25-50% of estimated value of the ship and its contents. If the player does not get their ship released from impound within 30 days, it is destroyed.

  • Docking and storage fees: These fees donā€™t exist currently in EVE, but I think that Jovian space could have different rules for those systems that have NPC stations. These would have value both as ISK sinks and as an added source of uncertainty and risk. The fees would be time-based and charged daily based on whether or not the player docked a ship or stored inventory at any time during the past 24 hours. Iā€™m not sure what a good rate would be, but the mechanics could be based on storage size. The system would impose hangar size limits, charge by hangar size, and require the player to increase the hangar size if they need to store more. If the player lacks the funds to pay the storage fees at the time they are imposed, the stored assets would go into asset safety with a minimum release fee equal to the double the normal storage fee plus 10% or higher of the stored value. Storage rates would continue to be charged while the assets are in asset safety but at double the normal rate, so the bill could become quite high if assets are left unretrieved for too long.

The above ideas are just my vision of what could or should be done with Jovian space. However, they illustrate the potential value of both opening up new territory in EVE and revisiting some game mechanics. The Jovian space Iā€™ve proposed is a more fragmented and mysterious space overall than existing regions in New Eden. By introducing these variations and the implied uncertainty and risks associated with operating there and dealing with somewhat different game mechanics, the EVE sandbox would become a more interesting and complex place to play.

Changing and varying the sandbox would impact many aspects of gameplay including combat tactics, industry, and trade. By creating a fragmented region that is both hard to get to and harder to travel in, both opportunities and challenges would be created. Individual and small groups of players willing to dive in and explore new regions would be rewarded with the opportunities that go with that, including the experience of building infrastructure up almost from stratch. Existing large corporations and alliances would also benefit from the new opportunities via access to new ships and modules. However, the latter would not be able to easily extend their power into the new regions due to the wormhole access restrictions.

TLDR: Jovian space could be opened up and used to both add new content and revisit and change some of the mechanisms that govern the current EVE sandbox as we know it.

2 Likes

What a trainwreck of ideas and thoughts.

1 Like

Not at all, simply a different vision for how part of the EVE sandbox could work. If you have specific criticisms, please present them. ā€œTrainwreckā€ is not a very useful commentary from which to build upon.

3 Likes

Was I replying to you, or everyone? Sorry if I was replying to you directly, I meant to make a general statement. The reason for the statement is more or less based on the fact that the chance of anything in here ever seeing the light of the day is ā€¦ miniscule ā€¦ to say the least.

In regards to your post ā€¦ well ā€¦ before I do that, Iā€™d rather like to ask why you believe that opening up Jove space would actually bring back old players, or help bringing in new players? I can see room for the former, sure, but the latter would be rather nonsensical. New players donā€™t know ā€œoldā€ space, so ā€œoldā€ space would be just as new as ā€œnew spaceā€.

Besides, thereā€™s plenty of players who would not go to jove space AT ALL just because suicide gankers would not even receive punishment according to the current rules in highsec. Okay, sure, them not actually going there might not be a bad thing, because all they do is farming and crying anyway.

In any case, what really struck me as odd was ā€¦

ā€¦ this.

On one hand, I guess, itā€™s better than having it destroyed. On the other hand is it actually achieving nothing, because I can have hundreds of ships ready, easily being able to circle through them all within a 24h period ā€¦ or, hell, even a week. Itā€™s not a problem that would keep most people away. Then I get them back for a fraction of the price Iā€™ve paid for them and can repeat the cycle once again.

In the end is it nice to see so many people post ideas, but on the other hand does it feel like most people first should learn to actually understand how to actually come up with a good one, thatā€™s actually properly thought out. Thatā€™s not a stab at you personally, but in general.

Anyhow, guys, knock yourselves out with this thread. Iā€™m peeking, and maybe sometimes Iā€™ll catch an actually good one worth applauding.

Implement nakaaras ideas , mix in some of the other posts and we can all start eve with fresh eyes.

My ideas might be to hard for others to accept.

This sounds like circular reasoning. The truth is more likely that it was hard, for new players, because CCP didnā€™t know how to or understand to allow those new players a relatively fair and balanced playing field against those who had been here longer and acquired greater advantage.

Consider that if Bowser had been controlled by a player and had actually been as smart as ā€œsuperā€ Mario or Luigi, he would have kicked their ass right out of the level nearly every time. Would you have played part 2 after that experience? Is that good game design?

EVE is hard for noobs. Letā€™s make it hard for everyone.

1 Like

I really like this post, but not because I agree with it. This really is the other side of the argument and I thank you for expressing yourself so clearly.

1 Like

On balance, goods are not being destroyed. They are being created. More of everything is entering into existence in the EVE universe every day. More ISK, more tritanium, more fried logic circuits, more Exotic Dancer, Male, etc., etc., etc. Your assertion that this would obliterate the economy is patently false.

To elaborate and speculate a little further, this might be why PVP in the game takes on a predator/prey dynamic for the most part. Lions ā€œfightā€ wildebeest when they need to ā€œcreateā€ energy and more biological tissue. Lions only really fight other lions (or hyenas) when there arenā€™t enough wildebeest to go around. But in EVE, there is always more ISK, more tritanium, more fried logic circuits, more Exotic Dancer, Male, etc., etc., etc. Thus, EVE either needs a higher lion-wildebeest ratio or it needs fewer troubled young men becoming disillusioned with life and entering into careers as Exotic Dancer, Male.

1 Like

This is a pointless discussion.

2 Likes

@Solstice_Projekt hey man, happy cake day

1 Like

Iā€™m not in a position that would allow it, and if I ran the majority of the scaredbears would hate any platform I ran on, because Iā€™m very much in favour of a pre Incarna style Eve in terms of conflict opportunities.

2 Likes

And used it himselfā€¦

Exactly. They donā€™t want it to change, not fundamentally into WoW in Space. So if you change it what happens to those paying customers?

Suppose 50% or more of those customers leave? Is there any assurance your ā€œplanā€ will replace them 1-to-1? No. It is a very large gamble. In fact, it is another instance of uncertainty because there is no way to calculate the actual risk.

1 Like

Teckos

Youā€™re just making stuff up again:

  • WOW in space??? Nobody has suggested anything of the sort
  • 50%?? Hereā€™s another great statistic, also made up on the spot: what if only 2% leave, but many more start playing?
  • Whereā€™s my plan youā€™re referring to? Certainly not in this thread
  • Change implies a degree of uncertainty? Yes. Whatā€™s your point?

Youā€™ve done what I referred to in the post you quoted. You know what you want (or rather what you donā€™t want), but you canā€™t find a rational justification. So you make up a few random claims instead - this time all ā€œStraw Manā€.

I think you can do better.

Offer them incentive to motivate them, this is a one time shot and wonā€™t require longer commitment.

TL;DRā€“EVE is a game environment that is both complex and adaptive. As such any belief that you can ā€œguide such a environmentā€ or ā€œdesign for a specific outcomeā€ is a belief that is both foolish and hubristic. You are going to fight the current players every step of the way.

EVE is a sandbox yes? So the question is, if we preserve this and we see the same thing despite whatever changes you try to implement. That is players still decide to shoot each other? That is, CCP has tried to implement changes to achieve various desired outcomes and generally theyā€™ve been pretty poor at doing this. A big part of the reason is the players react back and adapt to the changesā€¦because we are in a sandbox environment.

Thus if you want to make changes and have them really take effect you are almost surely going to have to remove the sandbox element of the game. And once you do that then there is a risk that,

First off, I didnā€™t say it had to be 50%, but that it could be or some other large percentage of the current player base. Suppose it is 10% is that alot? It probably is and many people on this forum would be here either howling or crowing depending on their view point.

And why would players leave? Because implementing the changes many people claim would revitalize the game wonā€™t. They wonā€™t because the players are going to do what they can to maintain the status quo/adapt to the changes. We have seen this a number of times. CCP Greyscale had this grand vision of reducing the large power blocks and having NS be this collection of small entities engage in small wars over a handful of systems. But try as he might he couldnā€™t achieve that goal. In fact, things actually got worse in that the big coalitions took over large chunks of NS.

Even something like Fozzie sov hasnā€™t really broken up much of the coalitions. The area they control has gotten smaller, so in a sense it has opened up more of NS to new groups, but the big groups are still out there doing their thing.[1] In fact, what tends to kill coalitions/alliances is something entirely endogenous to those coalitions. They often rot from the inside out and then another group comes along and smashes the brittle shell. To be sure there have been exceptions.

EVE is an example of spontaneous order in the sense that what we see players doing in the game is generally of human action, but not of human design. That is, there is no grand scheme in terms of how NS is going to look. Any attempt to impose such a grand scheme would entail taking away much of the freedom players currently enjoy. Not even CCP has a ā€œgrand designā€ really. Sure they tweak mechanics and change things and introduce things, but how players use those tweaks, changes, and new things more often than not, IMO, surprises them. Why? Because the players have the freedom to try out new and unanticipated ways using those tweaks, changes and new things.

This is why when people say, ā€œOhā€¦to get more people to play itā€™s really simpleā€¦ā€ I think that person is being very naive. ā€œBreak the the metagameā€ they say. Ha. Good luck with that. That was exactly Greyscaleā€™s vision and it fell flat on itā€™s face, IMO. In fact, his vision was starting to look dystopian from a game play perspective. ā€œLetā€™s make the game really miserable to play. That will break up those big coalitions and their metagaming!ā€ Yeahā€¦sureā€¦who wants to play a game where doing so is miserable?

Yeah, yeah I know. The reaction is, ā€œIā€™d never want that.ā€ So said everyone who has a grand plan for something complex and adaptive. When they see that people donā€™t want to follow their grand plan or worse are doing things to undermine pretty soon that is when things like coercion and violence start to become common in real life versions of this. Since you canā€™t use coercion and violence against players youā€™ll try and remove those options that you feel are contrary to your visions and as you do so players will stop playing as you take away more and more.

So yeahā€¦the players donā€™t want change. And Iā€™m not talking about us shiptoasters, Iā€™m talking about players in the game who donā€™t care about the forums, by and large. It is those guys who, when you implement some change, are going to react back against it, adapt to it, and even work at undermining your change in ways you donā€™t expect. Why? Because they have that option and they are going to do what they can to preserve the way they are currently playing the game.

[1] In fact, this may very well be a significant contributor to what we see in terms of the MERs and Delve and the Goons. Goons have moved into a much, much more compressed space. Being in a much more compressed space means that it is easier to provide a capital/super capital umbrella while krabbing away down there in Delve. So in a way Fozzie accomplished some of what Greyscale wanted too, but with an unintended consequence that sends some people on this forum in paroxysms of whining and hand clenching.

3 Likes

Are you concerned that everyone still remembers the scrotumite incident?

I think most have forgottenā€¦

Somthing I have often wondered, just how many more players could EVE sustain?

:thinking:

Itā€™s more the Fedo food festival scandal that involved all those exotic dancers and some bovine livestock.

/shudders at the memory.

1 Like

Waitā€¦whatā€™s thisā€¦sounds good. :stuck_out_tongue:

1 Like

It could have happened to anyoneā€¦