Were any of them public at anytime?
Top tip: if they were, you should dec yourself and crack them for goodies
Our goal is not to get you comfi and remain in high sec. Our primary goal is to connect you with players that are doing stuff that you would enjoy doing. So we pull you into our community and try to introduce you with different aspects of the game and then push you forward 
This way we hope to help with the initial new player retention rate.
I think there are two primary lines of thinking that lead new players to quit:
- The game is too hard/too complicated/the players are too mean
- There is nothing to do
Both of those, of course, are false. But, the problem is, things designed to show new players that 1 isnât true tend to make them think 2, and things designed to show new players that 2 isnât true tend to make them think 1⌠E.g., connecting new players with old players definitely helps fix 2, but usually takes the form of the old players blowing up the new players, which aggravates the perception of 1. And, changes to make care bearing safer helps fix 1, but leads to 2.
I think one problem that could be solved on that front is that the cost of engaging in PVP is actually way higher, proportionally, when somebody is starting. The first cruiser a player ever buys probably represents 90% of their ISK, where for an older player who might engage in PVP with that new player, the ship they use probably represents 0.01% of their ISK. If the new player loses their cruiser, they may be looking at like 20 hours of mining with a civilian mining laser or something to get back to where they were⌠And the new player has probably never tried PVP, so risking 90% of your net worth on something you donât know how to do seems like a really bad idea, and having it imposed on them against their will feels like griefing to them. I wonder if there isnât a way to let new players practice PVP without that much risk. E.g., some kind of noob proving ground for players with less than some level of SP, where the default insurance pays out 95% of the cost of your ship and its fittings and where the rewards would be proportional to 5% of the cost of that T1 cruiser⌠Not with filaments that new players would need to learn about and buy, just launched with a button that is prominently available to them. I dunno what the solution is, but I think that initial stretch where PVP is ultra-costly and virtually impossible to prevail at, is one of the problems for new player retention.
I donât think the solution is to hustle every newbro out to some nullsec corp. That seems like skipping over a lot of content, some of which is actually really fun.
3 Likes
The funny thing is that the ccp devs REALLY think the recent changes would make anything betterâŚ
Only shows that they have NO clue about the gameâŚ
3 Likes
Your off-topic and/or insulting posts are getting flagged because they are inappropriate. Please do not try to hijack this thread into a whine session about getting flagged. Plenty of people here are posting a variety of opinions and disagreeing with each other without getting flagged.
The âwhyâ is simpleâŚ
Correct. Itâs very simple, and itâs unfortunate that your obsession with risk-free menial farming nonsense has made you too blind to see it: conflict is content, and this is incentive to create content. It also has the nice side effect of increasing the value of successfully establishing your own station as an accomplishment since it is now more difficult instead of being a participation trophy that anyone can buy.
The funny thing is that the ccp devs REALLY think the recent changes would make anything betterâŚ
They do make the game better. They just make it better for people other than you, the people CCP actually wants playing EVE.
The real issue when this happens is that the new player have failed to adhere to the single most important rule in EVE: Donât fly what you canât afford.
It is possible to PVP in Frigates and Destroyers and there are roles both in small scale and fleet battles for those kind of ships. Iâm new and is currently building up my war chest but Iâm not gonna even consider flying a cruiser until I have enough to replace it atleast 5 times over without grinding for ISK.
2 Likes
Thatâs excellent, and it sounds like you made it over the hump. Thatâs awesome. Welcome!
The problem is, most people who give the game a try never make it over that hump, and everybody would be better off if more did.
2 Likes
-
New players do buy Plex, they PvE to get ISK to increase in game ownership (ships, fits etc). PvE for advancement is the 1st stage of new player retention for MMOs
-
If they do buy Plex to buy a station, tho they are more likely to Plex their account & ISk grind with others, they will be more likely to remain in EVE as they are stepping into group PvE, the second stage of player retention.
-
Once the have established ownership in the game and advanced to group PvE they will move onto PvP, retention is higher if this is a voluntary step not an enforced one.
Destiny,
You make some good points however you miss the point of High Security Space. Eve is a sandbox true where everyone can play their game. Remember the picture of all the careers in EVE Online. There is a reason many long term players still choose to live in High sec verses living in Null sec in a major alliance. They perceive High Security Space to be safer, we have our issues but having your house burn down just so the gang can get at your jewelry box without a chance that it maybe destroyed in the fire makes no sense to me and doesnât help high sec industry at all.
Two points in response:
-
High-sec industry doesnât need help right now. It needs the opposite of help. Itâs so saturated with participants, that thereâs virtually no margin to be had producing anything but the most advanced goods, like high-end T2 ships.
-
Getting a citadel isnât the equivalent of subletting a room in someone elseâs apartment; itâs a commitment. Itâs reasonable to expect to defend such a possession in some capacity. Hereâs the thing: right now, it makes no sense at all to siege a structure, unless youâre doing it out of principle alone, because thereâs no payout to speak of. With quantum cores, there will be a financial incentive. However, that incentive will only truly work for small groups, because when there are too many participants in a siege, the payout per person becomes negligible. And if youâre facing a small group, you only need a few people, along with a citadel gunner and proper armament, to deter a siege entirely. An Athanor, by itself, can shut down 2-3 attackers without a problem. Add a few defending Drakes and Blackbirds into the mix, and the enemy wonât be able to do anything unless they bring so many people that theyâd be better off doing level 3 missions in terms of income. Maybe itâs finally time for high-sec carebears to pull themselves up by the bootstraps just a tiny little bit?
Playing the game doesnât entitled you to hold assets in the game that you are unable or unwilling to defend.
Thatâs their problem, not the gameâs. The game doesnât care how you perceive things.
Thatâs unfortunate. I canât help you there, but hope that you eventually make sense of it because thatâs how the game will be once this change goes through.
What is the point of making a comment like this? Itâs off topic and unrelated to everything in the discussion.
Where in any of the development material did CCP explicitly state that âhelping high sec industryâ is part of their intent?
Yes, like everything in Eve even structure bashâs will be min/maxed, with the only one getting truly hurt is the lone player or the newer player who doesnât have a group to call on to help defend his/ her structure. In your eyes, they should just take it down now, and frankly many have which is hurting not only industry but mission runners and explorers also. Its the circle of life i guess. High sec industry will be the minnows.
The ânew player who still somehow anchored and owns a structureâ lie again. 
They donât qualify to own a structure. And this isnât the only such example in EVE. Solo and new players also donât qualify to own capital ships, for example. How exactly is this unfair? Some elements of the game were intended specifically for group play. Citadels are one such element.
Why do people keep claiming that these things were meant for solo players and noobs?
It really isnât, and especially not the latter.
Is that your opinion or is that the skill injectors talking?
I donât get what youâre asking here.
If Citadels were specifically for group play CCP would have made the ability to anchor them a group activity & the ability to own them for multiplayer corps only.
Incidentally, whatâs this solo players not qualified to own a structure/capital/anything BS - Bjorn Bee (solo player) has streamed as a solo player doing capital roams but according to your post heâs not âqualifiedâ to own a capital.
1 Like
you seem to have a opinion on the way others choose to play EVE. Well, we all donât feel the need to blow up other players.
1 Like
Not necessarily. You can compensate for the requirement of additional players with personal skill and competence. However, the general intent of those features is still group-focused.
1 Like
Itâs not a personal opinion of how others should play the game. Itâs an observation of how CCP intended the game to be played.