Proposal to add high-sec contents and system improvements to improve new player retention rate

[Beatlise]

Please allow me to post about adding and improving high-sec content.

This proposal is not simply about raising the high sec hourly rate.
I’m talking about adding more content and fleet experiences to the highsec, which is the starting point for all players, to increase the influx and retention of new players, prevent existing intermediate to advanced players from leaving, and increase the overall player population.

◆1. Contents problems and proposed (quest type)

Problems

1. Players just starting out have little ISK, skills, and standing, and their only options are to play L1-L2 missions at best, or the SoE epic arc, which can only be played once every 3 months.

2. The four major national epic arcs also require a standing of 5.0 or higher, so a lot of time and effort is required to be able to take orders.

3. The data center mission is not very interesting since it can only be undertaken once and is a quest to collect tags to increase the standing of the nation.

4. The COSMOS mission has a problem where the quest cannot be completed, and there is no prospect for improvement.
   List of lost COSMOS mission items

Because of this, when they start mission running, they are left with the feeling that they are being forced to endlessly play repetitive content with an overwhelmingly small variety.
Also, for existing advanced players, the only content that allows them to take advantage of battleships is L4 missions. The current L5 missions only exist in low sec, which limits the number of people who can play them.

Proposed Improvements

1. Add a main story quest.
   I strongly hope for a sequel to the wonderful story added in NPE. It makes us expect that a grand adventure across the galaxy is about to begin, but yet no continuation of the storyline has been implemented! This would be a misrepresentation of the quality of the product!
   Also, by implementing a main storyline, new players will be able to understand that "this game…for now, it seems that in the beginning, you should just continue with the storyline while earning money and searching for treasure in the many sub-contents.
   Improving the game so that new players can easily recognize what they need to do first is very important to prevent them from leaving the game.

2. New L5 mission for high-sec
   Currently, L5 missions can only be taken in low-sec, but I would like to add a new L5 mission that can be taken in high-sec as well.
   Many of the current L5 missions (perhaps due to the fact that they can only be performed in low sec) can be conquered by simply sniping the boss from a distance, making them very efficient as a money-making strategy. For this reason, we believe that the high-sec version of L5 is particularly suited to content tailored for small fleets of advanced players who will need to take their time and destroy many dangerous enemies.
   In addition, since high-sec mission runners tend to avoid lowering the Faction standing of the four major nations, it is preferable to implement missions that are mainly content fighting NPC pirate and rogue drones.
   
   

◆2. Contents problems and proposed (site type)

Problems

1. The only options are either solo treasure hunt (DED, exploration) or participate in raids such as incursions and FOBs.

2. Anomaly is not interesting contents because it is a simple task to get DED escalation.

3. Incursions need to be rebalanced for scout site and assault site. (I am submitting a separate request for improvement)

4. There is no small group content that beginners to intermediate can participate in with little initial cost.

5. FOBs have at least the following problems

   • as the number of fleet people increases, the number of enemies also increases. (It is more efficient to attack with fewer people, and the point of gathering people is lost.)
   • Rewards are split head to head, so the more people you have, the less ISK you get per person.
   • It is difficult to find the venue because it does not appear on the agency’s screen unless you are in the same region.
   • Freighter-sized loot boxes drop, but when opened, the contents are BPCs, and the apparent volume change is unnatural.

Proposed Improvements

1. Improvements to the Incursions
   I have already submitted a separate improvement proposal to adjust the number of pop-ups on the site and to improve the scout and assault sites.
   Improvement proposal for High-Sec Incursions, Scout sites and Assault sites

2. Improvement of FOB
   Adjustments will be made to allow people to conquer more smoothly and improve in the direction of a multi-player structured battle raid.

   • The type and number of enemies will be fixed.
   • Reward is not a headcount split, but a fixed amount for all fleet members. (Same as Incursions)
   • Modification to be able to look up the location of FOBs from the agency’s screen even if they are not in the same region.
   • Modify the volume of loot.

3. Mining Blitzes to be Permanent
   I will make combat and mining content permanent so that beginners who have just started playing the game and miners who are not good at combat can enjoy small-scale fleets with ease.
   With a fixed ISK reward, the rewards will remain the same as long as they stay within the maximum number of pilot in fleet, allowing even beginners with only T1 equipped ventures to play an active role, and lowering the psychological burden of participation.
   In addition, this content is very operation-intensive, and since the maximum number of people at a site is fixed, it is difficult to deploy a large number of sub-accounted characters. This makes it an ideal option for players who want to enjoy the content in its purest form.
   (Of course… the amount of payout may need to be adjusted a bit)

◆3. Contents problems and proposed (instance type)

Problems

1. T0-T3 of Abyssal Deadspace are practically solo contents.

2. The price of hulls and equipment increases due to the high difficulty level from T4 onward, and the contents are for advanced users.

3. The number of contents is small because of the new implementation history.

Proposed Improvements

1. Addition of “EDENCOM Blitz (tentative name)” Abyssal exploration & combat content
   I propose to add exploration & combat content for up to 3 people who can enter with their favorite ship under BC as an instance type content for beginners to intermediate users.
   This content will also serve as a pathway to obtain DED LP and EDENCOM standing, which are hard to obtain under the current specifications.
   Further, by designing the content with a high volume of operations, like as mining blitzes, it will make it difficult to use a large number of sub-account characters, which will benefit players who genuinely want to enjoy the content.

   • Example)
     After the filament jump, hack the Triglavian container in the surrounding Abyssal space and store the Triglavian something objects inside into the EDENCOM research ship. The objective is cleared when the specified number of objects are stored in the research ship.
     After clearing, fleet members will receive a fixed amount of ISK and DED LP, EDENCOM standing will increase slightly, and the survey ship will drop a container containing EDENCOM something items when it leaves the fleet.
     Adjustments will be made so that it is recommended to have a combat ship accompanying the escorting ship, as a small number of NPC enemy forces will appear. (For example, NPCs attacking EDENCOM research ship will pop up, making it impossible to clear the ship without dividing the roles between a frigate for hacking and a battlecruiser for combat.)
     (However, leave room for just barely a solo clear with a ship that elaborates on trial and error.)

2. Addition of a Proving Ground filament for fleets.
   I would like to see a system that allows our people to engage in combat with each other in an Abyssal Proving Ground environment.
   Not a few beginners are interested in PVP, but the first thing such players are looking for is simulated or symmetrical combat between friends or fellow beginners. The current PVP environment is full of asymmetrical combat, and there is too little room for beginners to have fun and develop their skills.
   In addition, since there are many 2v2 regulation matches these days, a system that allows players to practice maneuvering with a partner in advance would lower the barrier to participation for many more existing players.

◆4. Contents Chart

By incorporating the above proposed improvements, the chart of high-sec PvE contents will be as follows.

[For beginners]

1. Introduce main story quests for solo players who can immerse themselves in the world of EVE.

2. Increase the number of small-group contents in a fixed-amount ISK format to increase the fleet experience where beginners can get support from intermediates.

3. Increase the amount of content that can be easily played in a short amount of time in accordance with like as mining blitzes.

The above measures will improve the game withdrawal rate, especially within the first 3 months. (Currently, the withdrawal rate within 3 months is 98%)

[For intermediate level players]

1. Introduce solo main story quests that allow players to immerse themselves in the world of EVE.

2. Increase the number of small group fleet contents in the form of fixed ISK to enable fleets to support beginners, or intermediate players to have a tense fleet experience with each other.

3. Increase the amount of contents that can be easily played in a short amount of time in accordance like mining blitzes.

4. Increase the interest of raid contents so that they have a clear goal for their future skill plan.

[For advanced players]

1. Addition of contents that can be played in small groups with other advanced players, with a higher level of difficulty than the L4 mission, allowing full use of the proud battleship.

2. By conquering and building expertise in high difficulty raid contents, we will earn the honor of becoming a future goals for many PvE players.

Since the rewards for major PVE contents such as L4 missions and DED4 are split up among fleets, it is currently more profitable for intermediate and advanced players to play solo. For this reason, we will increase the amount of fixed-price ISK contents and adjust it so that intermediate and advanced players can join fleets with beginners and still guarantee a certain level of profit.

This will improve the contents and fleet experience for both new and existing players.

◆5. Other improvement proposals

5-1. Improvement of Agencies

For example, can add icons to each agency item so that we can tell at a glance whether the content is PVP or PVE, whether it is for beginners or raids, whether it is for combat or treasure hunts, whether it is for solos or fleets, etc.?

Also, please state that ice mining and planetary development are not playable without Omega in the first place.

Agency is the first screen that a newbie who has just started the game will see, so it needs to be clear at a glance “what content this is” and “what content I can play now”.

5-2. Warning Signs for Lowering the Faction Standing in Security Missions

Some security missions may lower the Faction standing of the four major states.
I have heard many reports of people who, without knowing the dangers of such missions, have carried them out, causing the Faction standing of the four major nations to drop and preventing them from entering the high-sec of the its nation.

Currently, there are very limited ways to increase a faction standing, which requires a lot of time and effort.
Therefore, I would like to request that you improve the system to display a clear warning on missions where the faction standing of the four major nations is lowered.

And “What is standing?”, Please add an explanation or tutorial on the disadvantages of reduced standing.
For new players, this event is “unreasonable” and increases game abandonment.

5-3.Rebalancing the Suicide Gank

I have separately posted proposal for improvements to attract and retain new players and prevent existing players from leaving.

Proposal for Rebalancing of the Suicide Gank

I would like to submit a proposal for rebalancing the Gank in high sec space. Also, I would like to get some data to help us plan for attracting and retaining new players. Please read that as well. ◆1. Problem Focus 1-1. Cost-effectiveness imbalance of Gank Today, the mainstay of high-sec Ganker is the so-called "Void Catalyst" equipped with T2 Neutron Blaster & Void ammo, which can project high DPS at extremely low cost. This is a great advantage over other ships often used for Gank (HAM Cara…

◆6. Finally

I would like to ask everyone who is thinking of starting EVE. Which of the following gameplay do you want to do?

• The Security and income in high-sec areas are poor and contents is scarce. It is difficult to establish an independent force because it is necessary to become an affiliate of a large alliance from the beginning and receive various types of support and contents.

• The security and income in high-sec is good and there is a lot of contents. Not only can you be a part of a large alliancee from the beginning, but you can also enjoy the content solo or with friends and set up an independent force.

I ask all newbie players: Which of the following would be less likely to de-motivate you?
I ask all PvP players: Which of the following is the tastiest prey to hunt?

• High sec security and income is poor and contents is scarce; in search of ISK and fun contents, they are forced to set out for low/null with a ship they put together with little money, only to be shot down by other players.

• The security and income in high sec is good and there is a lot of contents. After earning a lot of confidence and ISK in high-sec, they leave for Low/Null in their boastful ship for further challenges and are shot down by other players.

And I ask you, CCPs, which of the following is EVE's direction?

• The New Eden, where the retention rate of new players is reduced and a player-driven economy and PVP are driven solely by existing players.

• The New Eden, which increases the retention rate of new players and allows more new players to participate in a player-driven economy and PVP.

Again, this proposal is not simply about raising revenue in high sec. I'm talking about increasing the content experience in the high sec, which is the starting point for all players.
I'm talking about increasing the population of players by increasing the influx and retention of new players before asking for more people in low sec and null sec.

First, get to know the background of New Eden through the solo-friendly main storyline and get people to like the game world.
Then, they get to know other players in the low threshold, small-group Fleet contents and get support from intermediate players.
Eventually, they discover the fun of completing content in fleets, meet a community they want to play with, and set goals to challenge themselves with more challenging contents such as raids and PVP.

This roadmap is what Highsec should offer and what new players need.

And above all, making players uncomfortable who want to play at their own pace in high-sec will not increase the population of low-sec or null-sec. They will simply going to other games where they can play at their own pace.
The results are evident in today's player retention rates. I think so the current policy has already failed.


The above is the content of my proposal.
I hope you will consider this proposal for the future survival of EVE ONLINE.

[Aisha_Katalen]

This is like trying to pass a bill through congress that in itself sounds reasonable, it just has 17 sneaky attachments that are pure evil.

[tutucox_Khamsi]

IMO no
the more you try to design eve and make activities the more you depart from what makes eve great
Eve is not a carnival , lets see the bearded lady yayyyyy , now the air guns … aka theme park
to me every system must have some resources and players should warp around collecting , fighting , trading … npcs should be for the most part invisible except for selected areas were PVE players try to farm and PVP players try to exploit
the content generates itself by interactions and emergent gameplay

edit:
sandbox games are based on a bunch of simple systems , destroy a block , pick the block , put the block

etc

[ResonanceOfWar]

You have put a lot of work into it and I have not read through it all yet ill reserve judgement until I have.

[tutucox_Khamsi]

ill give one more example

imagine EVE mining ( bore fest , looking at the grass grow ) VS a mini game active mining style
some players ask for active mining
because
they are stupid
imagine 1000 hours repeating a lame mini game
and thats one the pillars of the MMO… only repeating a lame mini-game generates ore…
good luck

the idea appears to be good if you don’t think about it

eve mining is perfect for eve , because its not about complex systems , its about the ■■■■ the players do around the system

[Etch_Masuka]

And another one. My someone has been busy.

It’s very difficult for me to not view this through the optics of already having ready your very unreasonable lets rebalance ganking thread. When viewed together this just screams of “i want all the isk and all the safety”.

Anyway……. I dont have the energy to comment on everything. So ill just comment with my main observations which will most likely be all the WTF’s I have as i read through.

@Beatlise

Currently, L5 missions can only be taken in low-sec, but I would like to add a new L5 mission that can be taken in high-sec as well.

Hard Pass. There should be reasons for even the most hardcore of high sec carebear to consider venturing into different space. If a player wants to progress to L5 missions then they need to absorb some level of significant risk.

@Beatlise

Anomaly is not interesting contents because it is a simple task to get DED escalation.

It’s not interesting but its very rewarding even for a brand new character. I’m not sure how you get an initial investment of 10mill for refuges. We have our new pilots running them in Tristans.

@Beatlise

There is no small group content that beginners to intermediate can participate in with little initial cost.

Disagree. New players can fleet up to do anything. DED 3 is too hard solo……fleet up. You have approach all the activities in your mission and ratting tables as solo activities. They don’t have to be. And the reward is still there if you target the correct sites.

—————————————

Different topic but nothing to quote. I have no idea why you are estimating the isk cost of entry for sleeper caches as 20mill, 350mill and 500mill. That’s mental. A limited can be done in day one heron. 2mill tops. A standard can be done in a well fitted magnate (or any other t1 exp frigate). and the superior can be done in the most part in a cov ops.

Seems to be a common thread of overestimating entry requirements.

@Beatlise

The type and number of enemies will be fixed.

FOB’s are interesting because the more you bring the more they spawn. I like them dynamic

@Beatlise

Reward is not a headcount split, but a fixed amount for all fleet members. (Same as Incursions)

This is already the case. I always get the same amount regardless of if we have 4 in fleet or 10.

@Beatlise

Modification to be able to look up the location of FOBs from the agency’s screen even if they are not in the same region.

Pros and Cons to this. If we have a fleet around then yes we might want to go out and about and pop these. So it would be nice to see where they are. But on the flip side when one spawns near us sometimes we need to time to get a fleet up and I’m sure that it would be popped before then given it would become regular content for some. I think i prefer the status quo. Or maybe expand the time/range thing for the agency. Initially its only visible in system, then next door then 2 systems then region. Maybe if no one is popping it the visibility expands to everywhere?

@Beatlise

Contents problems and proposed (instance type)

The problem with instance type content is that it takes pilots out of space. While im guilty of running these for easy isk every so often i dont support any improvements/expansion or whatever to these.

@Beatlise

Some security missions may lower the Faction standing of the four major states.
I have heard many reports of people who, without knowing the dangers of such missions, have carried them out, causing the Faction standing of the four major nations to drop and preventing them from entering the high-sec of the its nation.

This would be a decent QOL improvement for newer players.

@Beatlise

◆6. Finally

This section again like in your other thread exposes the very specific agenda behind your suggestions. Total safety/total isk. And spinning that like its how new players will be retained. You have some good stuff in here but ultimately the direction you seem to want the game to go would break the game. Especially for me

[ISD_Traindriver]

Moved this Thread into the correct Forumscategory

[Kezrai_Charzai]

That’s a lot of work to put in, it’s great that you feel enough interest in EVE to volunteer that much effort.

There are some useful points in there and some not-so-useful ones. The post is so broad however, that most forum posters will simply skim it (I admit that I did).

I won’t comment on it point by point because frankly, CCP doesn’t read and doesn’t care about suggestions made in the forums. The primary purpose, in my mind, of discussing things on the forums is to sort of get various ideas circulating, so that they’ll be discussed elsewhere - on Discord, on Reddit, in game, etc.

In that way an idea might, maybe, possibly, eventually even filter into the groupthink consciousness at CCP and slowly wend it’s way into their view of the game.

Towards that end, posts and threads have more impact if you break the concepts down to one or two primary points per thread.

Some of your QoL/interface suggestions might be useful and could go in the QoL thread in Features and Suggestions. Some of the ‘more content’ ideas at least aim in a useful direction.

I would point out that, in my personal experience with newer or returning players, few of them say they’re quitting because the reward ratio is too low, or the risk of ganks is too high. The disconnect with the game occurs at a higher level than that, and has more to do with whether a player engages with the ‘idea’ of EVE and it’s lore or is simply evaluating the game based on the apparent mechanics and gameplay.

EVE’s initial gameplay is, quite frankly, cumbersome, repetitive and tedious. The AIR NPE takes some steps towards improving this but is much too short, and quickly abandons the player to standard career agents. And the higher gameplay is oriented towards people who feel a significant long-term commitment to EVE.

Retention rates, IMO, have less to do with proper risk/reward balancing and more to do with the fact that the ‘potential’ of EVE, shall we say, continually gets buried behind a wall of details and tedium. For the long-term subscriber, the issue often boils down to whether they’re keeping or losing faith with CCP’s ability to do anything positive for the game’s future.

It will take more than adding some new missions and storyline arcs to change that.

[Zumbas_Egdald]

This is something I would like someone on CSM/DEV to at least think about it…

Why? This is not speaking bad, cause its normal to talk bad… this is something that someone who loves EVE dedicated a lot of time getting facts, arguments, organize and present them…

Nice one!!! And thanls for your interest in EVE!

I would love some CSM members (EVE wont show up here!) and have their opinion about it…

[QuakeGod]

So basically, you want to turn EVE into a high sec, perfect safety, farming simulator. No thanks…

[Shipwreck_Jones]

Of course, I disagree with a lot of your opinions, but you also get a lot of stuff factually wrong as well (and seem to be unaware of why certain things are the way they are).

Ugh. I’m not sure if I should go through it. It will take like 30 minutes, and you aren’t even responding to your threads.

@Beatlise

I hope you will consider this proposal for the future survival of EVE ONLINE.

And not for nothing, but your proposals won’t save Eve Online. They might save a game that resembles Eve Online in terms of lore, art, ships, and so on. But they won’t save Eve. In fact, they will help kill it.

Sigh. I do not understand how there are so many people playing this game that don’t actually want to play this game. Seriously, I need someone to explain this to me.

[Beatlise]

The starting point for all players is high sec. And there are players who don’t want to go out to low sec or null sec (and don’t want to PVP as much as possible).

In fact, the population of low sec has not increased, although past updates have tightened up on high sec.

The first step toward increasing the player population itself should be to improve a world where people are forced to do things they don’t want to do.

[Shipwreck_Jones]

No one is forcing you to play an always-on PvP game. But you come in here, talking about other players ruining your fun while you try to nuke play styles and take the game in a new direction, leaving the people who actually love this game for what it is behind.

It’s unbelievable. I don’t understand it. It would be like me going to Blizzard and asking them to implement always on PvP and a full loot death mechanic into WoW. The only difference is, is that Blizzard wouldn’t even notice my request, let alone laugh at it, while CCP seems to be slowly catering more and more to you guys.

You’re Japanese, right? Well, what you’re proposing is kind of like the equivalent of an American putting ketchup on sushi… that we all have to share. Some people might like that. But as far as I’m concerned, you’re ruining it.

Unfortunately for us, it seems like the people who love Eve for what it is are growing more and more outnumbered by the day.

[Skyla_Amarr]

So what you’re saying is that people should be forced into pvp and red always on?

[Shipwreck_Jones]

I’m so glad you brought it up.

See, a well balanced UPvP doesn’t force people to take “unfair” fights. Instead, they try to balance “fight or flight” mechanics. Lemme explain.

Unrestricted PvP (sometimes referred to as always-on PvP or non-consensual PvP) games:

• Don’t have any sort of PvP flags or PvP free areas (well, not counting the instanced content CCP has started adding to the game)
• Don’t have matchmaking or any other restrictions ensuring “fair fights” (not counting the arena)

This means that everyone is subject to PvP at any time , and that if you didn’t give players a way to avoid “unfair fights,” they’d experience lots of deaths without the ability to do anything about it. Naturally, that would be extremely frustrating, and cause many players to quit. So, devs will try to create and balance mechanics that help people to avoid fights that they don’t want to take (i.e. lock and align times, WCS, nullification, covert cloaks, probing difficulty), and mechanics that help people to force fights (i.e. warp interdiction bubbles, points, scrams, interdictors, choke points, combat probes).

Some people think that if you die to an unfair fight, that means the game is unfair. But, the truth of the matter is that if you found yourself in an unfair fight, that means you were outplayed before the first shot was even fired -well, assuming the game is balanced properly. The problem is not one of balance, but perspective.

See, a lot of people come at UPvP games like they’re boxing matches, and then get mad when the game doesn’t ensure fair fights. However, they need to be coming at it like war, and realize that it is up to the players to determine the who, what, when, where, and how of fights (and do note that the how is not limited to direct combat in Eve Online). Not only does this add a whole another layer of depth in and of itself, but combine it with a sandbox, and you get a level of player choice and agency that you just can’t find in other games.

It’s ■■■■■■■ amazing.

Oh, wait… this just in… some people don’t like UPvP, and want to see it removed from a game that was built upon it. Welp, you heard em folks. Shut it all down. I know some people absolutely love Eve for what it is, but we need to cater to the people who don’t actually want to play this game. I mean, it’s only right. We should nuke people’s play styles and leave existing fans behind in order to gamble their favorite MMO on the slim chance that CCP will be able to pivot the game in a direction that makes anti-UPvP’ers happy. After all, there are a ton of UPvP games out there for us to go to, but so precious few consensual-only PvP games.

Fun fact, there are actually very few UPvP games that exist (i.e. Star Citizen, Albion Online, and Sea of Thieves), and the fans of those games have to fiercely defend keeping UPvP a part of those games as well. Because, apparently tons of options isn’t good enough. They can’t let us have anything nice. They won’t be happy until UPvP has been purged from every last ■■■■■■■ game on the planet.

[Skyla_Amarr]

So you want to nerf the pvp in sea of thieves?

[Dom_Basse]

EVE is supposed to be unfair. You are not supposed to permanently linger in hi-sec expecting huge gains. Nothing in EVE is supposed to be risk-free and rewarding at the same time. Not even Abyssals, as they are ultimate gankfests, though they are relatively the safer of the bunch.

If you want high income tough luck, come to low sec. Venture into null sec. In hi-sec, get into large co-ordinated fleets and be smart and willing to drop isk, or be very smart. Can’t do any of this? Too bad.