If this is the claim that “players who have been killed in combat stay longer”, it’s false.
Supposedly originated with a “journalist” who didn’t understand “correlation does not establish causation”.
It’s consistent with something obvious: the longer a player stays, the more likely they are to lose a ship in PvP Combat.
No, it originated with CCP…I’ll wait for your retraction here…
The problem with “bittervet denial” and victim blaming is that it’s a “call for inaction”.
Why try to change anything if you believe that only a tiny proportion of humanity is “fit” to play EVE?
Perhaps that’s why so many people here never make suggestions for improvement.
Wrong again. Vets are desperate for change…but it’s not the change YOU want so you just whine here and play the victim.
That is an opinion, there was a time that ganking had a really major impact in the loss of players, but it is not the case now. So you can say correctly that at this point in time as you see it Ganking has a minimal impact in player loss. I can say that after the -25% ROF was removed from destroyers there was a period in which ganking had a major impact on player loss, most notably casual hisec miners.
War decs were confirmed by CCP to have a major impact on player loss and resulted in their decision to change war decs to what they are now, you opinion is different to what CCP found.
What you say after that has merit too.
I think that the biggest issue for player retention is the lack of new players ability to get into the more interesting play. I was wondering if CCP could find some way to accelerate the ability for new players to get into what I call the best PvP ship type which is the HAC class for their race, which also helps in that you have to be an Omega to use it. This will enable them to be effective and competitive, this would also require CCP perhaps to do something about the starting point of key fitting skills. Which gets to the final point, perhaps at this point it is better to just give new players the key fitting skills to level 4.
Using “these” for made up phrases that mean nothing does little to make them “real”.
When was that and please point to the data that illustrates that claimed fact.
They could switch the time a T3 and a HAC take. Thats something Id noticed.
Rama
Vets, who (as a group) could probably influence the “sandbox”, do very little.
There are some shining exceptions, but IIRC they’ve all been around (even Mike “Magic School Bus” Azariah) since Elena here was hatched. Where are the new player initiatives to make EVE fun for new players?
Mostly vets do whatever suits them, and if it has a negative effect on someone else they blame “the sandbox”.
No it did not. You are misunderstanding what is said and what you want to hear.
edit : also it was specifically debunked by CCP in a later vid.
Guess you missed the CSM election…you know, the direct influences mostly staffed by the bitter vets you rail against.
Runa … just don’t. There’s no point.
They’re just trying to destroy an actually good discussion.
Read through the posts before Elenas, Andersons and Dracvlads. Then think about what happens when they start posting and people start responding, then ask yourself what the better approach would be.
Answering them, achieving nothing, or talking to reasonable people to move forward.
Thanks.
We’ve talked about this extensively in the wardec discord and Pedro and me have been chewing through this. Been a while, but I can give you a short version.
The problem is that everyone can create a corporation literally from day one, which means corporations have no actual value. There are pretty much zero requirements (that one skill really doesn’t count for anything). There is no form of social responsibility. There is no need for understanding what you’re doing. There’s an abundance of corporations that literally all do the same, with no brains behind it. There’s “New Player Corporations” not deserving the name. There’s plenty of dead corporations with names unavailable, potentially forever.
The first step towards a structured society should be CCP increasing the requirements significantly, to give corporations a (perceived) value again. Another requirement should be that characters, who want to create a corporation, should have “served” in one for some time. Activity can be tracked with the Activity Tracker, so that’s possible already.
We also need more types of corporations, but I’m still at my coffee. I can try finding where I’ve written stuff down, though I fear it’s a waste of time. Not because of you, but because of CCP.
Then I’ll blow your mind with this:
One of the points of Triglavians is to make up for the lack of destructions in highsec.
Yes. There is something that manages to transform a lot of people to the cookie side of things. It’s the same technique vets used in the past, before CCP ripped new players out of old players’ hands:
Injecting Adrenaline.
Adrenaline gets people hooked.
This works! I’ve reformed quite a few myself that way!
And it’s much better than trying to drug them with rewards, because it doesn’t actually require content to be made for them (as only players can cause adrenaline spikes) and Adrenaline is a natural drug anyway.
CCP lost tons of old players years ago, who quit because of the ■■■■■■■■ suspect state and protection button, which only purpose was to add a psychological deterrent, keeping new players away from trying shenanigans.
You saw that I posted the link right? You watched that link right? It literally says the the opposite of what was claimed.
no it does not. I edited so : actually CCP debunked what you said in a vid afterwards.
Your interpretation of the study is wrong.
Naturally you have evidence that CSM has made major efforts to make EVE more attractive to new players? Or were the complaints here about CSM being controlled by very large Alliances, and focused on making the game easier for big organizations, entirely false?
The key point of this discussion is to make Eve more attractive to new players, anything else is just attention seeking and virtue signalling on your positions. What will make new players want to stay more? What can CCP do to get them more engaged and see a possibility to enjoy the game which is conflict, but then again conflict to some is farming others easily, which gets into the patsy argument. When people say I don’t want to be an easy kill patsy so no chance I am continuing with this imbalanced rubbish.
That most of you have no clue about the impact of this is highly amusing and sad.
Then lets start at the beginning.
Throw away the launcher and give us back splash pages.
That front end is hideous, and is three hammy billboards that tell new players nothing.
All the MMOs have them, and EvEs Is getting worse.
I am not interpreting ANYTHING…CCP literally says it…
“People that die (ganked) are the most likely to stay subscribed”
Here I cued it up for you…
I think a better approach would be offering new players the choice to start in low sec. Nullsec already has enough players, lowsec definitely doesn’t and it’s a nice middle ground. Plus, low seccers would be all over them trying to recruit them, because they definitely need more players down there.
It’d be pretty much the closest we can get to the old standards that just worked and increases the chances for Adrenaline injection massively. Those who don’t want it should be allowed the option to switch back to highsec at no cost, with no loss. That way the chances of losing them are smaller, too.
I don’t view linked videos. If CCP had something to say, they must have done so in text.
OTOH if that video says that “people who stay longer are more likely to have lost a ship, therefore losing a ship means you’ll stay longer” it would be proof that the speaker and anyone who believed them are fools.
“Correlation does not establish causation” is always true.