It’s OK the scumsuckers doing wardecs can pick up suicide ganking.
Wardecs hurt player progress at the start and new player retention. You want few hundred people happy or thousands happy?
1 Like
Actually, no he did not. He was merely presenting the results of the analysis. He did not make any generalized statements about retention. His comments on retention were regarding the 3 categories. Those killed illegally in their first 15 days have the best retention, those killed legally had the second best retention, and those not killed at all had the worst retention. That is all CCP Rise said. It is you who are reading more into his comments than is there.
How long after it ended? A day? A week? A month? Never?
What activities were measured? Mining? Mission running? Jumps between systems?
Did they unsub? Were they ever subbed?
Yeah it matters.
If people are going to use this information to suggest wardecs are making people quit, then yes the retention rate of those who don’t get wardecced matters. As does the rate at which either demographic turns into ‘healthy players’ since that seems to be being measured somehow.
This is exactly what I’m talking about when I say you’re occasionally dishonest. You’re criticising data that does not support your agenda, but was given to the players, and then championing data where you don’t even know what it is, only that it exists, because you think you can twist it to your own gains.
How many? Enough? Cause you say so?
Another one saying it hurts new players…
You want few hundred people happy or thousands happy?
I want what gives us the longest term of good content creators and gameplay.
Now consider how those that don’t get shot at don’t stick around. But those that do get shot are more likely to stick around.
Don’t forget: people who do the "this would be better for the game "are just lying. What they mean is “this would be better for me”. They’re not interested in how things affect newbies or how we need quality players, not quantity.
They just want it easier for themselves.
1 Like
Except that’s a flawed conclusion.
There was no play hours analysed. Or value gathered analysed.
Their numbers included people who played 5 minutes then quit before even undocking.
The more likely explanation is people who stuck around longer had a higher chance of getting into pvp due to straight hours in game. Which would make the pvp part irrelevant because they already were sticking around. And the whole pvp makes people stay “statistic” is then at best irrelevant or at worst completely the opposite of what truly affects retention.
That said. I’m interested in a deeper look at ccp stats in this case and what measures they did use. At least if they use those stats for any changes anyway.
No one’s actually talking about the topic:
The fact that there are lots of haters, even in this thread, spreading lies, nonsense and dictating the “discussion” using you all as their puppets.
Thanks for being on-topic. 
It’s not flawed: that’s the whole point of CCP Rise’s analysis: the new players that leave are not the ones being ganked or exploded. There are, or I guess were, much more important factors determining whether a player sticks around than whether you get ganked, like say being able to find the undock button.
CCP was looking for factors that influence new player retention to target they development efforts, and it turned out that PvP was not one of them. If anything, it correlated with better retention in opposition to the hypothesis they set out to test. Sure, it is just an observational study so correlation and causation are not proven, but at a minimum it says that PvP isn’t an important factor in determining whether a player stays and CCP was best to look elsewhere to improve the NPE as it refutes the “myth” as they call it, that non-consensual PvP is a major factor in driving new players away from the game.
Now, that was only the first 15 days so it is completely fair to say that perhaps non-consensual PvP is a more of a factor driving 6 month players aways, the players that made it through the difficult first few weeks where the vast majority of players are lost to other things. That study didn’t address that, but any study that tries to needs to look at proper controls and consider the activity created and players that stay because of that feature. Problem variables can only be identified by comparing them to the other variables that may influence player retention since players are always quitting this game.
Maybe this analysis done by Larrikin did that, it’s really hard to say with only second-hand reports related through a cloud of NDAs. But from the sounds of it, it looked corporation activity mainly, not player retention, and the only concrete bits about wars effects on new players say they aren’t affected very much, although what is a new player isn’t defined. It’s really hard to conclude much about something we haven’t seen a proper presentation on.
But I’ll keep an open mind. Perhaps we get some more numbers in a blog or in Vegas, but regardless I hope this is the kick in the pants CCP needs to spend some time improving wars. I wish the ‘haters’ and the ideologues would take a step back and stop being so polarizing and stop trying to weaponize a paragraph in the minutes. Fixing wars is going to take some time and not be fixed by flipping a switch, and inducing people to panic isn’t going to help CCP get things done right.
1 Like
How many of these players quit because of wardecs?
THAT’S what I’m ultimately getting at.
I understand that being wardecced can make some players quit. But that’s because you learn more about eve during your first wardec, or gank, or scam than you do in 6 months of missioning or mining. These are the crucial sink or swim moments in a players life that separate a year long player, or a decade long player.
And it’s important to know whether wardecs are preventing the growth of long term players, or just sorting the chaff from the wheat. And then what is it about wardecs that is driving this retention or lack of.
-
How is the leadership/membership of a Civilian Corp structured?
-
How much will it cost to setup?
-
Are there any member restrictions?
-
Can Civilian Corps join Alliances?
-
Can you be kicked out of a Civilian Corp, and by whom?
-
Whom admits new members?
-
Is there a Civilian Corp Tax, and who sets it, and whom is it paid to?
-
Does the Civilian Corp have a HQ and can it share assets in Corp Hangars?
-
How will the Civilian Corp transition into a Player Corp?
-
Can the Civilian Corp be given access/preferential treatment at Player Corp structures?
My understanding was that th numbers showed that players in hisec generally just dock up for wardecs as they are not interested in PvP. Then the number that bother to undock afterwards is so small that it would justify an immediate suspension of wars.
I’m not sure on the immediate suspension bit myself, but that sounds really very bad. I think this is getting lost in the multiple merged posts thoughso perhaps @Brisc_Rubal could clarify on this.
I’d prefer a solution in place before removing/amending something so fundamental to EvE, but if the numbers really were showing that wardecs in their current form were harming the game, surely a suspension should at least be considered.
CCP did not need these players anyway. 
1 Like
According to minutes, nobody seconded his notion of suspending wardecs, till they are fixed.
They are not locked into Civilian Corps, that glass ceiling is flexible, they can move it any time they wish.
And partake in content that they don’t log on for, hmmm no brainer that one.
I am after a more player developed balance solution to the two player groups based on blowing pixels up, the objective here is to develop more aggressive PvP counter play from hisec defender players while staying true to the PvP orientation of Eve.
1 Like
Answer my 10 questions here:
1 Like
This isn’t about you, you are here already playing. You want people to blow up player pixels, that have no intention of blowing anything up other than rocks and NPC’s.
Why are you trying to force playstyles onto people that don’t want it.
1 Like
Answer my 10 questions on your Civilian Corps.
As a basic outline that CCP might follow, with the usual disclaimer that CCP can do whatever they want to at the end of the day.
- Same as a regular corp.
- Same as a regular corp.
- Why would there be?
- Probably not, otherwise they would have to be specifically Civilian Alliances (Which is possible, but just seems awkward).
- See 1.
- See 1.
- Last time this got heavily discussed, it was suggested that it have the basic NPC corp tax to NPC’s.
- Up for discussion.
- Somewhat similar to friendly fire tag I would imagine. Except on a longer warning timer.
- Given individual players can be given such treatment, there is no reason to not allow this for Civilian Corps.
All of this is pretty no brainer, the fact you are hammering this point so hard when you know no-one but CCP can actually give a final answer… It starts to raise questions as to why you are hammering these points.