The data we saw included the number of players in attacker corporations vs. number of players in defender corporations, the number of wars with kills and the number of kills, and the in-game activity (how active their members were in the game) before a war / during a war / after a war of younger corporations.
In every single situation, the numbers were way skewed. It was pretty clear that the war dec mechanics are driving players from the game.
Maybe it was because you handed them free alpha chars? You havent multiple observations and concluded that they are related.
And probably these statistics have some graph ‘main percentage of killed ships are from null-sec alliance, not small corps’. And probably these statistics have a percentage of pilots who create new corporations.
Point is, that was not bandaid change, it was full rebalance of whole T3C class. It was widely participated by players, and took some time to polish it. You have a point that Loki became stronger than other and I think CCP should act more swiftly to change that. First data about the T3C usage was at fall, I think at Vegas and after that Loki should get his tweaks. Overall I don’t see as many complains about how changes was made, quite the opposite for the last minute ecm changes. See my point now?
for how long CCP has this data? New or older players?
Wow:
“CCP Larrikin pulls up activity data for players of corporations that have wars declared against them and it shows considerable activity drops in all activities during the war. They also show that the low activity continues after the war ends. Brisc Rubal noted that the numbers here were so stark, it would justify immediately removing war decs as a mechanic and promising a fix after the fact. The CSM in general were surprised at how stark the numbers were and noted it was clear this mechanic was having a significant impact on player recruitment and retention.”
Would love to see the numbers myself, but kind of obvious that CCP would frown on something that causes players to significantly stop playing their game.
I joined E-Uni 3 years ago and have lived under near permanent war dec by one entity or another.
The example used at the end of that section of the minutes in reference to Red Frog made me think how much this topic is not understood. You could argue Red Frog are avoiding the mechanic, but the reason for wanting to war dec them would be legalise the ganking of their haulers.
Any solution needs to address why the war decs are made and how they are being funded. The aggressors themselves avoiding the full repercussion of their decs by holding their main assets out of their corps.
I doubt unless those items begin to get addressed, any solution is not going to see a long term change.
this part is quite scary.
And what was the result? One ship outclasses all the others, and all the ones that were useful before are not used anymore. That’s not a better result than anything the CSM has/could have accomplished.
Your point originally was that focus groups are a better way of solving problems. Here’s a perfect example of a focus group that resulted in a solution that didn’t actually fix the problem, it just broke it in a different direction.
Very interesting.
Will these statistics be made public? I, as well as a lot of others would love to see this data judging by the comments made.
Considering most wars end up with zero kills either side, it would seem that its not the dying that is affecting the player retention but the war in itself, if this is the case then I cannot currently see any change that CCP makes including linking wars with structures make any difference to the statistics.
I hope so.
And check mate, mate. 
I am a bit upset that the lack of mining drone velocity was not brought up or was not noted if it was. Please look at a slight buff to mining drone velocity. I am not talking about anything stupid but at least 1,000 m/sec., with maximum skills the current mining drone velocity is only 687.5 m/sec.
I would like high sec bounties and loot drops looked at as well. As my figures are starting to show if you are doing the normal high sec anom combat sites with a ship using guns or missiles the player is losing isk per because of the poor bounties/loot drops.
Do you know that you arguing about the only balance approach that actually worked and was composed from all players independent of voting. I would have more confidence in focus group choosed by CCP than CSM voted by NS blocks. CSM is not representative, CSM is biased. We all know that, CCP know that. That’s why at nullification session at summit you were “owned” by CCP. CCP disagree with what you think.
The “Loki case” didn’t prove the approach was bad, it shows the very thing CCP is bad at, pull out results and make haste tweaks. It’s no brainer Loki need nerfs.
Props to Brisc, some may think he’s “just another CSM from SOV null”, but he’s had the courage to ask for opinions from all of us and took the time to listen. For him to say this, it must have been very bad.
say what?
“Brisc Rubal noted that the numbers here were so stark, it would justify immediately removing war decs as a mechanic”
I hope CCP will remove the wardecs and then we will see what next.
They have to gather new set of data too, in new environment.
If one ship clearly has an advantage over the others, why was the single ship not nerfed a little in the next release?
You starting sound like Salvos, did you read my post?
