Well duh, the game has been running since May 2003, it is now December 2021, why are you surprised that within this time people have learned to be more affective at avoiding loss? In case you and OP didn’t know games that have been around and available for that long tend to have veterans who have developed a good understanding of the game.
Well ok, but have you considered the new players who try Eve are younger and better at games/techy things than the people over 40? You’ve got young kids in school these days learning sophisticated programming languages due to society becoming more technical (many kids used rasberry py in school etc) we never had much like this, yea we had amstrad, commedore/amiga, spectrum, but most things were analogue when I was growing up. I left school in 1994 it was that year classrooms around the UK started having Pc’s available.
I saw a 2 year old the other day using a mobile phone like he had been using it for 15 years already, I thought hmmm this kid will be a good gamer when he grows up. When I was that age all we had was one of those house phones where you had to put your finger in the number and drag it around to the end to select the number…lol
Also, we could have a deeper look at Tech/Gaming. Now Streaming/Youtubing games started to become popular around 2010 with many Youtubers becoming rich from playing a game for others to see. I think this created a culture of people gaining a further understanding of games by “copying” the game play styles featured by these youtubers.
Why can’t we consider that many players make Eve videos like “How to fit a ship in eve” or “how to avoid loss in Eve” Why can’t we consider that new players seek out these videos and simply just copy what they saw the vet doing on youtube? So as I have said many times we must consider everything in these threads with human behaviour being near the top, a graph will never tell you why something is happening, you have to work that out for yourself using knowledge and experience.
Today Youtube is celebrating 1 Trillion, yes 1 Trillion views of Minecraft content, We must understand how outside forces affect a game and the players, it cannot be ignored.
Some of you new bro’s seem to have a good understanding of the game, I am excited for you bro It’s good to see you using other players for different activities. When you say “solo AG” are you referring to the Anti-gankers committee? If so then yes do join them to get perspective on the overall game, but also make sure you join a sov corp, go and see what wormhole corps do as well, spend some time in npc 0.0 and give yourself a varied game.
Eve has actually had some amazing marketing it’s really no joke and it is one thing CCP has done very well. A lot of gamers I speak to actually know of Eve online and how damn hard it is even though they haven’t played it, the reason for this is it’s been featured extensively in many popular magazines and gaming news outlets. I know that literally every Eve player has seen an add for Eve while they are generally surfing the internet.
The new players in Eve seem to be joining the game with some good sound awareness of the game which I think is great.
Its important because when you make a thread about how skewed game mechanics are against miners because you got ganked and did everything perfectly……… you dont want to be embarrassed when everyone on the forum points out you were in low sec with an untanked procurer and got destroyed by a player that has a flashing neon sign on his ship that says “im a ganker, im a ganker, im a ganker”
who wants to be faced with reality when it doesnt fit the narrative.
Okay, changing web / player demographics might have something to do with a lower ratio of destruction in relation to player numbers. Might. It’s a wild guess that has nothing to back it up but couldn’t hurt for CCP to run some numbers see if newer players learn the ropes faster.
Keep in mind though that at EVE’s age, “experienced players” have been experienced for a decade now and there’s not really a lot of new tricks to defend against. The EVE demographic has been checked in the past and it’s pretty heavily skewed towards an older player base. And the higher end of the older players are just as likely getting less able to avoid ganks as the younger crowd (who don’t really head for games like EVE anyway) are “just better at games”. EVE isn’t even a twitch game anyway, which is primarily what the younger crowd excel at. It’s definitely an “age and treachery beat youth and speed” design.
While you’re “considering all things” in the thread, I’ve yet to see you take even a fraction of a stab at considering (or understanding) the thread topic. “What can be done to increase destruction levels in EVE that’s more effective than what CCP has already tried?”
Go ahead, suggest your best, it’s safe here. I’m sure there aren’t a half-dozen posters lurking around who literally have nothing better to do for the game than wait for someone to propose an idea so they can argue loudly and endlessly against it without ever spending a moment actually thinking about it.
I think we can’t truly get to a conclusion on what hurts about dying in EVE. Each one of us “feels” it differently.
But there are elements that add to the drama, sometimes… unnecessarily. Public exposure could be one of them but there are too many reasons to elaborate here.
One could say that kills are trophies. Others demand kills to undersign pretended experience, etc. I think public exposure is unavoidable.
The reason is simple: Try and find a similar game which publicity and commercialization is distanced from such numbers, events or data… then, try and find their popularity. --ok, don’t-- suffice to say, it’s a driver for commercial purposes. EVE --and listen carefully please, this is serious-- would never be as popular if it wasn’t a PVP game, nor it would have endured through the years over many other titles.
Peeps become celebrities for such reasons… or at least, their toons do.
It is unavoidable and I consider it necessary.
I speculated about our attachment to stuff in this game. Peek’d through the rabbit hole of mechanisms to reduce the drama… again, not with an intention of solving it, just to see if there will ever be a way and there is! or at least we’ve seen a couple of ways definitely not to go.
Does the big blue donut have an impact on levels of destruction? I know there have been a few chunks taken out of it but if that number of players are all blue to one another then they wont be engaging each other when they otherwise would have been?
And if so how does CCP fix that? Because ultimately thats decisions taken by a minority of players who control those blocks. Its not necessarily something that CCP can fix without interfering in the in-game politics.
Your corp is bigger than mine……….ill form an alliance with this corp…….oh you have an allaince now to……in that case we will form a mega alliance. And so on and so on. Till you have goons against the donut and a massive statelment outside 1DQ that goes on for months.
CCP/ME/YOU GUYS can come up with as many different ideas about how we can better PVP or destroy stuff. But as long as a handful of players are controlling null blocks, setting who can and cant be attacked, where members can fly, what fleet doctrines are……then nothing much is going to change. At least not for the large amount of players living in null.
The flip side to that however is SRP. If we are talking about losing a ship as being a deterrent for casual players getting involved in PVP then why not just join a null block, train into the doctrine, fleet up and have the ship replaced at zero cost when you lose it. I mean thats the closest you are going to get to consequenceless respawn PVP in Eve.
It’s not my place to suggest anything really, I’m happy to let better designers than me come up with something. I’m unsure if anything can be done in all honesty.
I can suggest a strategy though, perhaps CCP could look back into the past and review data where they had high login numbers and higher destruction. Perhaps they could re-employ some older ideas which resulted in higher destruction. But then what worked in 2012 may not work in 2021,
This obviously won’t be solved by players chatting in a thread. CCP will need to do a study on 1000 players and analyse their gameplay to see if that can provide insight.
I’m in no way pushing this idea, but I have been asked for an Idea and here it is: I had the idea of an Automated tournament system or lobby sort of feature, I could go in and browse what pvp duals pilots have set up, there will be lots of pilots there already waiting for people to join their pvp dual, it could be 1v1 or 2v2 or 3v3 etc, I can set up a 1v1, limit ships to T1 destroyer with T1 fit or limit value, in order for an opponent to join they agree with my terms, or if they set up the game I agree with their terms. There could be a facility to be a spectator and place a wager.
I’m not saying this is a great Idea, but if I knew there was a lobby with people “waiting to pvp” I’d be persuaded to join a team and have some fun. What do you think?
I suppose this is a kind of instance gaming, which is different from spontaneous multiplayer gaming. if anything this might get the attention of people who don’t usually pvp, a couple of miners might go for it and set up fights between each other which as a baby step in the right direction.
I think a gentle approach might be needed here like “it’s there if you want to take part” kind of thing.
It is true that it has decreased but not to alarming levels, there is a concerning rate tho.
But the holy sovereignty is kinda untouchable or it has not been tapped on to with the purpose of increasing PVP --enough–.
If we went to the attachment to stuff as an issue, an interesting view could be that Null settling is too cumbersome to risk and therefore, it’s protection is indispensable, leading to no choice but adhere to the donutbrella.
If settling was light packed and sov wasn’t so foundational, the donutbrella would perhaps explode in multiple entities and maybe there would be a reduction of confrontation scale while there could be more conflicts all over the place.
Destruction is not a consequence of SOV --per se-- or at least the current state of affairs don’t seem to show a need for change. There are less encounters but at larger scale --when they happen–.
In comparison, some years ago, the fights were “more real” as one could see plausible reasons derived from mechanics that encouraged confrontation in the SOV business. Now it’s more programmatic, as SOV became a game in the game, nothing really “serious”. There are many reasons for that which we could discuss for ages but I doubt it’s required changes are on sight of the horizon’s horizon.
However as a “destruction per capita” region, Zkillboard shows that Null has the most destruction by far for it’s population. Highsec wins for “total destruction amounts” just due to the high population there and the high value of some freighter kills.
Blue donut effect does of course decrease destruction but I don’t think it’s the primary factor (unless a lot more players have headed to Null than in 2015). So for sure it wouldn’t hurt to think of shaking up Null sov areas in ways that encourage more raiding/small conflict.
The effect of SRPs on destruction are a significant counterpoint to the often-heard “80% of players won’t PvP because afraid of loss” whines from the PvP crowd. Any decent player can easily replace many cheap ship fits. Any decent corp (especially null corp) can easily SRP hundreds or thousands of ships.
Players don’t PvP in EVE primarily because in the vast majority of cases there is no viable incentive to do so. Unless you’re a salt-miner or profit-ganker, there’s very little “in-game” motivation to engage in PvP. Give people a viable shot at achieving some sort of ‘progress’ through PvP and they’ll take it. Use “Um, go blow up your ships, because, um, it’s good for the economy” as the motivation and you’ll get a massive “shrug, no thanks” from the playerbase.
Basically you’re looking at a formalized set of “limited engagements” whereby you can set some parameters and let anyone interested in that battle format pick up the gauntlet and fight.
Hmm, well, it’s viable. It allows the potential to level the playing field so people don’t have to face the “I’d go to low-sec or WH except I’d get dropped on by players by 10x my SP and ship fit and nuked”. It would probably need some decently competitive rewards other than drops from the opponent (unless ship drops were increased in value) to get people to add it to their list of “productive things to do”. Rewards don’t always need to be ISK either, there are other avenues of reward that EVE hasn’t developed. It would also be best if there was a way for people from different sectors to quickly jump to the battleground because of course travel time is a very significant barrier.
I’m not sure it’s all that much different than the current “Abyssal Proving Grounds” but it’s generally best to work with what CCP already has than suggest something completely new (because it’s easier to edit existing code than create new, in many cases). So perhaps if Proving Ground is working out they could expand it to a more general and more easily accessed format.
It might not be popular with the existing PvP crowd who’ve been winnowed down over the years to the cat-and-mouse style “I only take engagements I’m fairly sure to win”, but it would certainly be worth checking the numbers on Proving Grounds and seeing if the support for more is there.
I do it to the young lads at work who try it but i just lead them from one thing to the next and very quickly they’re playing my game and just answering what im saying.
This one lad i told him that he needs to actually video his turd as it goes down the toilet if he takes a shtbreak and then immediately show the supervisor when he gets bacl and it worked. The supervisor for their shift i wish i could put into words his reaction but it was basically “wtf is wrong with you why are you showing that now fk off back to your station” XD
Or they see me fixing something and sometimes they show interest so one thing leads to another and they’re holding my tools for me for absolutey no reason XD
So where do you see the problem? Its all well and good saying stuff needs to blow up more. But where? Highsec? surely not given the amount of “gankers are the devil and should be removed from the game” threads we see. Nullsec? well as i said above………thats not in CCP’s control. If null blocks decide they wanna be blue then they are going to be blue.
So that leaves low sec. And every in game event “tries” to push people into low sec. All the best event sites are always in low sec…….presumably to get us to fight over them.
I see what you did there!..
People say that the perfect scenario to try and test, perhaps pseudo-experience PVP is Singularity. But then, you have to install another client, do stuff here and there, etc… it’s kinda burden for nowdays lifestyle. But look at those numbers!
I think it’s a great idea if it leads to more destruction “real in game destruction” given that experiencing PVP helps to reduce the aversion for PVP.
I don’t think arenas are the way to go, as they introduce an off script deviation that would reduce the immersion experience quality. But perhaps the Empire one day would decide that due to recurrent invading forces outpacing our def… and then create an Arena like a basic limited fitted hulls set with irrestricted weaponry (bubbles included, for example) … dunno, doesn’t sound much EVEsque, to me but it would open a window, yes.
But… If there was an instant and quick way to jump in the Sing server, reduce it’s complexity… or size It would also be great. I like it anyway.
It would certainly help move the game forward without disrupting existing gameplay if the goal was to increase pvp by any means necessary.
Yes, I’m looking to do abyssal runs as it goes, I had fun last time I tried. I think you’re spot on, the code exists for this and could be used for “The Arena” idea.
It could be about “Eve-cred”, if you get called out and refuse what does that say about you?
Guys, we might have something viable here, if we could write something up professionally and present it to CCP I’m sure they’d have a look. I’m kinda excited lol.
Shall we put something in the Ideas section of the forum?
The game has logs of you getting killed, you killing people, the tons of ore you’ve mined, all the failed attempts at ganking you.
It’s all in the logs.
But the game doesn’t make them all public knowledge. That’s what 3rd party apps do, like Zkillboard for kills. EVE merely supports those 3rd party apps, but does not publish your kills.
And why should you care about some 3rd party app?
Zkillboard is a fantastic source of information and a nice list of memories, but who cares if it shows you’ve lost ships?
Most players lost ships, many of them. And it is expected that you have lost ships while learning the game. And even experienced players still lose ships. The only players who never lose ships are either limiting themselves by avoiding all sorts of risky gameplay or are specialised alts.
Threads crying about gankers are irrelevant, really. There’s rarely more than a few dozen forum posters going on about it at any given time, which means there’s likely only a few hundred players overly upset about it at any given point.
That has long-term effects of course (if 800 players are upset about high sec ganking on a frequent basis then that adds to the “screw this I’m out” player declines). But it’s not the most significant thing going on.
Highsec PvP for instance could be improved by empowering more playstyles. If “pirate”, “ganker”, “miner extortion” and “suspect baiting” are all viable careers and EVE is supposed to be about open-ended gameplay where you “make your own story”, then “mercenary for hire”, “bounty hunter” and “space cop” should all be viable careers as well. But EVE was written by gankers and ganking is easy to code, so CCP has never made a real effort at balancing that.
Low-Sec has already been mentioned how to improve, read the thread if you want to ask for suggestions. Faction Warfare already mentioned as well, and of course Resource Wars is an excellent opportunity for both high and low sec that CCP has completely flubbed.
Nullsec however definitely is in CCPs control since they set the rules and can add or change anything at any time (see Blackout and all the recent ‘dynamic’ changes).
In Null, I’m not at all experienced. Only ever flew in and out a couple times for specific reasons. However given what I’ve read over the years it seems once you’ve got a lock on sov in your space it takes major, massive wars to shake that up (or for your block to be betrayed from within or fall apart). So in that case I’d design a system that rewards small scale “border raiding” and covert ops to encourage smaller groups to take dangerous forays into null sov. NPC sov from I can tell is doing ok but no experience there either.
Shipwreck Jones will tell you that constructive, well reasoned feedback is the way to go. And I agree although I would point out that, if you end up making something you think is worth taking a look at, either submit it to some CSM members for them to bring up, or post it on Reddit and try to get a lot of Reddit activity going on about it.
Because CCP pays (slightly) more attention to those venues than it does to its’ own forums.
It’s good to see you using other players for different activities. When you say “solo AG” are you referring to the Anti-gankers committee? If so then yes do join them to get perspective on the overall game, but also make sure you join a sov corp, go and see what wormhole corps do as well, spend some time in npc 0.0 and give yourself a varied game.
