Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Kile Kitmoore
8
|
Posted - 2012.03.15 17:22:00 -
[181] - Quote
They just fixed new player retention, updated Rookie ship graphics. All is well!
On a more serious note, with an extremely crowded market and more games going F2P for people to download and play, it must not be easy to compete. EVE is well known for it's complex gameplay, harsh game environment with a pretty serious death penalty compared to other MMO's, but that is the draw and one of the things that sets EVE apart.
I really don't know if the course CCP is on is going to be good overall. On one hand you could help existing player retention by revisiting old game mechanics but on the other hand, lack of new content could slow new players trying EVE. Let's face it, players like the new shiny stuff. The other problem I see is CCP breaking these old systems, AKA fixing that which is not broken, and angering veteran players and causing some account cancellations.
It would be really interesting to see the playing patterns of a new player. I would think the problem is trying to separate actual new players and ALT accounts but maybe CCP has a method. Do these constant NPE revisits have any real impact on new player retention? Does it really come down to getting new players into friendly corporations and that is the true silver bullet to keeping these new players? I wouldn't even rule out that a true multiplayer avatar environment (WiS) being a big negative for new players.
I think Inferno should really be a good indicator but if it flops the veterans will just show up and yell, "it's Summer everything is down right now." So we might not really have any good indicators until the next Winter expansion.
|
Liang Nuren
Parsec Flux
1068
|
Posted - 2012.03.15 17:28:00 -
[182] - Quote
Cipher Jones wrote: If you are not the type of player who is willing to teach a new player the ropes then don't ******* cry about not retaining them.
I remember back in the day when low sec pirates gave tips on how to avoid being ganked while PVEing in low sec. We should do more of that.
-Liang Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com PVP Videos: http://vimeo.com/user9887127 Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
339
|
Posted - 2012.03.15 19:20:00 -
[183] - Quote
Eve is before anything else, a game. It needs to be fun!
Fun does not always translate into winning, so long as the loss doesn't appear as though it was due to an insurmountable obstacle. Jimmy NewDude and his friends have zip chance against OldFart TearLicker and his gang of epeen goombas. Loosing in such a case is not fun, it's predictable, boring and pointless.
But What if JimmyNewDude and his friends can only be challenged by a group of similar or smaller ability? Now there is a chance at winning.
Here's what I would propose to wake up Eve. Take the total number of skill points of a corp or alliance divided by the total number of players in a corp to come up with a rating. This would be the corp/alliance "ability quotient".
Then, a corp/alliance can not wardec any other group that has a lower ability greater than five percent. they can war dec anyone above them that they want, but no one below that five percent difference.
This will allow young and/or small corps the ability, and protection, to face challenges they can handle. If it is something they can have a chance at dealing with, they just might have fun in loosing. As things are now, there's simply no point so they stay docked or go running for the hills.
PVP should be fun for newbies, not something to dread. |
Mirima Thurander
Total Annihilation. G00DFELLAS
267
|
Posted - 2012.03.15 19:32:00 -
[184] - Quote
Guttripper wrote: wall of text
i was around during that time and loved eve, everything was new, people where spread out more, there was still empty space
i can go on and on.
and it all boils down to, eve needs more space.
punch all the null sec players in the face turn lowsec into high sec null into low sec and add so many null sec systems it takes 2 RL days to get across the universe.
and we will have are old eve back.
I love the the smell of victory in the morning. It smells like... Blood, vomit and burning flesh.
|
Terminal Insanity
Convex Enterprises Unprovoked Aggression
271
|
Posted - 2012.03.15 20:16:00 -
[185] - Quote
IMO the #1 reason new players quit = Bordom.
Not because of eve itself, but because they join small boring corps who might have one or two ops every week. Corps who have maybe 2 people online at any given moment. Players join this corp and then end up playing by themselves. They get bored and quit.
If you look at other MMO's its far easier to join a large group of people and play with them. This group-play is what most people play MMOs for. In eve, 90% of the corps are tiny and barely active
I say this from experience. I used to run a highsec corp and was directly responsible for several people quitting because we never did anything.
My solution would be to limit the number of corps a player can create each year, and require FACTION standing to create new corps. OR just vastly increase Corp and Alliance creation fees.
Why? Because limiting/preventing small boring corporations from forming would greatly reduce the chance of new players joining small boring corps. It would limit corp creation to players who have really thought it out, and are willing to give that corp the dedication to create it. The corps that ARE created are more likely to be successful.
I understand people enjoy 'getting in on the ground floor' and thats commendable, but its not very practical if we all do it. |
Tobiaz
Spacerats
15
|
Posted - 2012.03.15 20:25:00 -
[186] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote:Cipher Jones wrote: If you are not the type of player who is willing to teach a new player the ropes then don't ******* cry about not retaining them.
I remember back in the day when low sec pirates gave tips on how to avoid being ganked while PVEing in low sec. We should do more of that. -Liang
Before or after they turned the noobie's ship in spacedust?
Personally I'm under the impression though that many of the 'better' pirates either started hunting in wormholes or joined the mass-wardeccing corps in empire. Aside from the semi-permanent camps at the well-known chokepoints, there are a lot less pirates in low-sec these days to give newbies some lessons about EVE. [img]http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/Tobiaz/sig_complaints.gif[/img]
This needs fixin' |
Tobiaz
Spacerats
15
|
Posted - 2012.03.15 20:34:00 -
[187] - Quote
Terminal Insanity wrote:IMO the #1 reason new players quit = Bordom.
Not because of eve itself, but because they join small boring corps who might have one or two ops every week. Corps who have maybe 2 people online at any given moment. Players join this corp and then end up playing by themselves. They get bored and quit.
If you look at other MMO's its far easier to join a large group of people and play with them. This group-play is what most people play MMOs for. In eve, 90% of the corps are tiny and barely active
I say this from experience. I used to run a highsec corp and was directly responsible for several people quitting because we never did anything.
My solution would be to limit the number of corps a player can create each year, and require FACTION standing to create new corps. OR just vastly increase Corp and Alliance creation fees.
Why? Because limiting/preventing small boring corporations from forming would greatly reduce the chance of new players joining small boring corps. It would limit corp creation to players who have really thought it out, and are willing to give that corp the dedication to create it. The corps that ARE created are more likely to be successful.
I understand people enjoy 'getting in on the ground floor' and thats commendable, but its not very practical if we all do it.
I totally agree with the reason, but I think your solution wouldn't be particularly effective. Even if you'd only be able to create one corp a year, it would make hardly a dent in the number of useless, newbie-devouring corporation in the game.
[img]http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/Tobiaz/sig_complaints.gif[/img]
This needs fixin' |
Qvar Dar'Zanar
EVE University Ivy League
5
|
Posted - 2012.03.15 20:35:00 -
[188] - Quote
I started playing like 6 months ago and still got some of those tip the first 2 times I got blown up. |
Liang Nuren
Parsec Flux
1068
|
Posted - 2012.03.15 20:39:00 -
[189] - Quote
Tobiaz wrote:Liang Nuren wrote:Cipher Jones wrote: If you are not the type of player who is willing to teach a new player the ropes then don't ******* cry about not retaining them.
I remember back in the day when low sec pirates gave tips on how to avoid being ganked while PVEing in low sec. We should do more of that. -Liang Before or after they turned the noobie's ship in spacedust? Personally I'm under the impression though that many of the 'better' pirates either started hunting in wormholes or joined the mass-wardeccing corps in empire. Aside from the semi-permanent camps at the well-known chokepoints, there are a lot less pirates in low-sec these days to give newbies some lessons about EVE.
Eigther - depending on the whim. I usually sent mine after turning them into space dust or sent them as part of my ransom attempt.
-Liang Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com PVP Videos: http://vimeo.com/user9887127 Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
Terminal Insanity
Convex Enterprises Unprovoked Aggression
271
|
Posted - 2012.03.15 20:42:00 -
[190] - Quote
Tobiaz wrote:Terminal Insanity wrote:IMO the #1 reason new players quit = Bordom.
Not because of eve itself, but because they join small boring corps who might have one or two ops every week. Corps who have maybe 2 people online at any given moment. Players join this corp and then end up playing by themselves. They get bored and quit.
If you look at other MMO's its far easier to join a large group of people and play with them. This group-play is what most people play MMOs for. In eve, 90% of the corps are tiny and barely active
I say this from experience. I used to run a highsec corp and was directly responsible for several people quitting because we never did anything.
My solution would be to limit the number of corps a player can create each year, and require FACTION standing to create new corps. OR just vastly increase Corp and Alliance creation fees.
Why? Because limiting/preventing small boring corporations from forming would greatly reduce the chance of new players joining small boring corps. It would limit corp creation to players who have really thought it out, and are willing to give that corp the dedication to create it. The corps that ARE created are more likely to be successful.
I understand people enjoy 'getting in on the ground floor' and thats commendable, but its not very practical if we all do it. I totally agree with the reason, but I think your solution wouldn't be particularly effective. Even if you'd only be able to create one corp a year, it would make hardly a dent in the number of useless, newbie-devouring corporation in the game.
Well the reason i propose that solution is that maybe it would make a player think twice before creating his crap corp. Maybe if he had to pay 1 or 2 bil to create the corp, he just wouldnt, unless he has several friends/investors who would help try to make the corp successful.
It would also act as a much needed isk sink
I'm all for other solutions, anything that can fix this problem. But i'm 100% sure this is exactly why most new players quit.
|
|
Roime
Shiva Furnace
289
|
Posted - 2012.03.15 20:52:00 -
[191] - Quote
Terminal Insanity,
only problem I see with your suggestion is that nobody wants corp members who don't have any initiative. Of course EVE is best served with purple dots around you, but if all you can do is spin ships and bore to death when nobody else is on, you are not an asset to a corp, you are a liability. |
Ai Shun
365
|
Posted - 2012.03.15 20:56:00 -
[192] - Quote
Ban Bindy wrote:People play WOW and Sttar Wars in droves because they can play casually and they can choose how much upset they want brought into their lives by other players. Players in Eve are told to get screwed and learn to like it. So which game do you think the most people will try? And which game do you think the most people will stick with? This is not hard to understand. People leave the game because it's a mean game, people are proud of how mean it is, and people constantly rub your face in it.
And that is okay. You know why? Because there are different games for different tastes. EVE is not to everyone's taste. WoW is not to everyone's taste. It is a good thing the market has a place for different types of games, isn't it? We don't need all games to offer the same experience; because that removes options for people who want something different.
|
Eternus8lux8lucis
Whack-A-Mole
83
|
Posted - 2012.03.15 21:43:00 -
[193] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:Eve is before anything else, a game. It needs to be fun!
Fun does not always translate into winning, so long as the loss doesn't appear as though it was due to an insurmountable obstacle. Jimmy NewDude and his friends have zip chance against OldFart TearLicker and his gang of epeen goombas. Loosing in such a case is not fun, it's predictable, boring and pointless.
But What if JimmyNewDude and his friends can only be challenged by a group of similar or smaller ability? Now there is a chance at winning.
Here's what I would propose to wake up Eve. Take the total number of skill points of a corp or alliance divided by the total number of players in a corp to come up with a rating. This would be the corp/alliance "ability quotient".
Then, a corp/alliance can not wardec any other group that has a lower ability greater than five percent. they can war dec anyone above them that they want, but no one below that five percent difference.
This will allow young and/or small corps the ability, and protection, to face challenges they can handle. If it is something they can have a chance at dealing with, they just might have fun in loosing. As things are now, there's simply no point so they stay docked or go running for the hills.
PVP should be fun for newbies, not something to dread.
Wouldnt work. Easy workaround. Few vets... TONS of alt accounts with 900K SP. Brings down the overall quotient to be able to dec anything given enough low SP alts. Strength isnt measured in numbers but in force of will. For if one motived willful individual stands many will fall around him that are weak.
http://tinyurl.com/YarrFace |
Sasha Azala
Blood and Decay
94
|
Posted - 2012.03.15 21:52:00 -
[194] - Quote
Roime wrote:Terminal Insanity,
only problem I see with your suggestion is that nobody wants corp members who don't have any initiative. Of course EVE is best served with purple dots around you, but if all you can do is spin ships and bore to death when nobody else is on, you are not an asset to a corp, you are a liability.
Maybe if people took the time to show people aspects of the game, then they would be less of a liability and more of an asset. |
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
339
|
Posted - 2012.03.15 21:53:00 -
[195] - Quote
Eternus8lux8lucis wrote: Wouldnt work. Easy workaround. Few vets... TONS of alt accounts with 900K SP. Brings down the overall quotient to be able to dec anything given enough low SP alts.
Are you going to pay for those alts, or are they free? Nothing stopping the noob corp from adding in their two alts as well.
Certainly could be some additional parameters, only chracters with an active training queue are added into the calculation, that eleminates the alt problem. |
Sasha Azala
Blood and Decay
94
|
Posted - 2012.03.15 21:57:00 -
[196] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:Eternus8lux8lucis wrote: Wouldnt work. Easy workaround. Few vets... TONS of alt accounts with 900K SP. Brings down the overall quotient to be able to dec anything given enough low SP alts.
Are you going to pay for those alts, or are they free? Nothing stopping the noob corp from adding in their two alts as well. Certainly could be some additional parameters, only chracters with an active training queue are added into the calculation, that eleminates the alt problem.
You can't eliminate the alt problem as alts are not necessarily just on one account. |
Sasha Azala
Blood and Decay
94
|
Posted - 2012.03.15 22:35:00 -
[197] - Quote
Terminal Insanity wrote:IMO the #1 reason new players quit = Bordom.
Not because of eve itself, but because they join small boring corps who might have one or two ops every week. Corps who have maybe 2 people online at any given moment. Players join this corp and then end up playing by themselves. They get bored and quit..
This is very true, some corps seem to think that inviting people to join and talk to them in corp chat once and awhile is enough to retain them.
Terminal Insanity wrote: If you look at other MMO's its far easier to join a large group of people and play with them. This group-play is what most people play MMOs for. In eve, 90% of the corps are tiny and barely active.
A lot of guilds in other games are tiny and have the same problem as corps in EVE with retaining people. But EVE has one other factor a lot of the larger corps in EVE are paranoid about spies for example, or put too many restrictions on joining.
Terminal Insanity wrote: My solution would be to limit the number of corps a player can create each year, and require FACTION standing to create new corps. OR just vastly increase Corp and Alliance creation fees.
Why? Because limiting/preventing small boring corporations from forming would greatly reduce the chance of new players joining small boring corps. It would limit corp creation to players who have really thought it out, and are willing to give that corp the dedication to create it. The corps that ARE created are more likely to be successful.
I understand people enjoy 'getting in on the ground floor' and thats commendable, but its not very practical if we all do it.
Limiting corps won't make any difference and in my case would be kind of inconvienient (single player corp). Most players will look to join the bigger corps anyway (players attract players as long as they're not soloists) but if the bigger corps reject the newer players then they end up in NPC corps or smaller corps and we've already talked about what happens if they end up in a bad small corp.
Simple fact is if you want to retain people in your corp you need to do more than just talk to them on occasions. Because if it's just talking NPC starter corps (in most cases, not all) generally do it better and if that fails there's always the help channel. |
Dragon Outlaw
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
44
|
Posted - 2012.03.15 23:30:00 -
[198] - Quote
Reset Null sec (and re-locate the valuable moons at the same time).
Grab popcorn.
Enjoy the entertainement. |
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
339
|
Posted - 2012.03.15 23:37:00 -
[199] - Quote
Sasha Azala wrote: You can't eliminate the alt problem as alts are not necessarily just on one account.
If they are not counted in the forumla, for not having an active training cycle, then why not? How many people are going to pay an extra 15 a month just to move the number so they can gank noobs? |
Sasha Azala
Blood and Decay
94
|
Posted - 2012.03.15 23:43:00 -
[200] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:Sasha Azala wrote: You can't eliminate the alt problem as alts are not necessarily just on one account.
If they are not counted in the forumla, for not having an active training cycle, then why not? How many people are going to pay an extra 15 a month just to move the number so they can gank noobs?
Some people have loads of ISK, I don't think a few PLEX here and there will matter to them too much if they want to get up to some mischief. |
|
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
339
|
Posted - 2012.03.16 01:37:00 -
[201] - Quote
Sasha Azala wrote:Adunh Slavy wrote:Sasha Azala wrote: You can't eliminate the alt problem as alts are not necessarily just on one account.
If they are not counted in the forumla, for not having an active training cycle, then why not? How many people are going to pay an extra 15 a month just to move the number so they can gank noobs? Some people have loads of ISK, I don't think a few PLEX here and there will matter to them too much if they want to get up to some mischief.
If someone needs to spend 500 mil an isk a month, times the number of alts needed to go after a 10 man noob corp ... that's a hell of a lot of ISK to go after 300,000 ISK ships. What's the point? Seems like they are greifing them selves. |
Soporo
26
|
Posted - 2012.03.16 02:12:00 -
[202] - Quote
Mirima Thurander wrote:Guttripper wrote: wall of text i can go on and on. and it all boils down to, eve needs more space. and we will have are old eve back.
This. Boiled down even more to suit me. Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats. - H.L. Mencken |
Sasha Azala
Blood and Decay
95
|
Posted - 2012.03.16 02:15:00 -
[203] - Quote
Adunh Slavy wrote:Sasha Azala wrote:Adunh Slavy wrote:Sasha Azala wrote: You can't eliminate the alt problem as alts are not necessarily just on one account.
If they are not counted in the forumla, for not having an active training cycle, then why not? How many people are going to pay an extra 15 a month just to move the number so they can gank noobs? Some people have loads of ISK, I don't think a few PLEX here and there will matter to them too much if they want to get up to some mischief. If someone needs to spend 500 mil an isk a month, times the number of alts needed to go after a 10 man noob corp ... that's a hell of a lot of ISK to go after 300,000 ISK ships. What's the point? Seems like they are greifing them selves.
Is there any reason it has to be a 10 person corp, can it be 5 or 3 even?
Anyway regardless, you're proposing to have corp warfare on a level playing field, meaning a lot of corps won't be able to war-dec other corps. I don't like the idea anyway.
You've probably heard this before many times, EVE is a sandbox. As with any sandbox you should impose the least amount of artificial barriers as possible.
Not all players from the corp are on at the same time anyway and that could make a difference of more than 5% between two corps at war. Who would the goons fight? Are you also including alliances?
I really don't see it working and certainly I think it would kill EVE as it is now.
You may as well just forget war in EVE altogether and just have arena matches. |
Noriko Mai
395
|
Posted - 2012.03.16 02:42:00 -
[204] - Quote
I started EvE BECAUSE it was so hard to get in. This was the reason I stayed. It was a cool feeling to learn something new every day, figure out how stuff works in eve and finding my niche. Not getting achievements for every crap I've done was realy satisfying. Imho the biggest problem I see for new players (I know a few) is, if you start without friends in eve and/or don't join a corp, you are lost. |
Indahmawar Fazmarai
The I and F Taxation Trust
325
|
Posted - 2012.03.16 07:53:00 -
[205] - Quote
Noriko Mai wrote:I started EvE BECAUSE it was so hard to get in. This was the reason I stayed. It was a cool feeling to learn something new every day, figure out how stuff works in eve and finding my niche. Not getting achievements for every crap I've done was realy satisfying. Imho the biggest problem I see for new players (I know a few) is, if you start without friends in eve and/or don't join a corp, you are lost.
And if you find new friends and/or join a corp, they may backstab you and get over with it for free. It's not as if the game rules enabled to punish griefers in any meaningful way, i.e. a way that could cause griefers to leave the game as often as their victims leave. EVE residents: 5% Wormholes; 8% Lowsec; 20% Nullsec; 67% Highsec. CSM 6: 100% non-Highsec residents.
Change that! Vote Issler Dainze for CSM7! http://community.eveonline.com/council/voting/Vote.asp?c=470 |
Darth Gustav
Sons Of 0din Fatal Ascension
142
|
Posted - 2012.03.16 08:49:00 -
[206] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Noriko Mai wrote:I started EvE BECAUSE it was so hard to get in. This was the reason I stayed. It was a cool feeling to learn something new every day, figure out how stuff works in eve and finding my niche. Not getting achievements for every crap I've done was realy satisfying. Imho the biggest problem I see for new players (I know a few) is, if you start without friends in eve and/or don't join a corp, you are lost. And if you find new friends and/or join a corp, they may backstab you and get over with it for free. It's not as if the game rules enabled to punish griefers in any meaningful way, i.e. a way that could cause griefers to leave the game as often as their victims leave.
Please define "griefing."
Because I think a lot of people leave the game over what I would call "normal gameplay" to be perfectly honest. He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom |
Valei Khurelem
439
|
Posted - 2012.03.16 08:55:00 -
[207] - Quote
Quote: Please define "griefing."
Because I think a lot of people leave the game over what I would call "normal gameplay" to be perfectly honest.
I give you credit Darth Gustav, at least you're not in denial about this like the majority of the forum posters on here.
"don't get us wrong, we don't want to screw new players, on the contrary. The core problem here is that tech 1 frigates and cruisers should be appealing enough to be viable platforms in both PvE and PvP." -á - CCP Ytterbium |
Stetson Eagle
ROC Academy The ROC
12
|
Posted - 2012.03.16 08:58:00 -
[208] - Quote
Florestan Bronstein wrote:Thorn Galen wrote:You have the numbers, you know we're losing a small number of new players on a daily basis. The number of players being lost to EvE outnumber the new players signing-up (who then also become ex-players).
No, I did not say EvE is dying - it's just not growing as well as it could be. Big difference there.
EVE loses more players than it gets in new sign-ups every single day yet it is still growing?
It's polarising towards more alts on fewer players. The number of sign-ups and characters is irrevelant for the game in the long run, though it's good for company business. If eve wants to live and not die of stagnation and mudflation, new players are needed, not characters. Where is the social reward in future eve if nobody is impressed by any accomplishments in the sandbox, because they have seen it before year and year again? |
Stetson Eagle
ROC Academy The ROC
12
|
Posted - 2012.03.16 09:30:00 -
[209] - Quote
IMHO griefing is a topic that has been discussed a lot, but it's been mostly rhetoric from both sides. Here's a bit more of the same.
Problem: Eve is dying since it doesn't attract new players, would it be better off without griefing? Hypothesis: Eve without griefing would grow bigger, "without griefing" means some highsec security (not punishment) mechanics in place?
Pro: + qualitively Eve is a game which allows griefing, and a refreshing rarity in that + historically Eve has always allowed griefing and still has a rich playerbase; it's working + griefing works as a player type filter, those who can deal with it are more fun to play with + Eve is an old MMO which will die eventually in any case, better to keep it the rarity it is + Eve can keep it's dedicated players playing longer than many MMO's because of it's sandbox quality which includes griefing playstyles, (insert studies here) (+ some forms of griefing work as a balancing gameplay and economical factor, e.g. Hulkageddon, corp infiltration and suicide ganking -> they should be left out of this discussion)
Con - Eve needs new players or it will stagnate and die - quantitatively games that don't allow griefing grow larger (insert examples and numbers here) - historically there are many analogies of games older than eve which still live, that don't allow griefing so it can be argued that disallowing griefing would not kill eve but make it large - disallowing griefing would bring and keep new players in the game (though some old players might quit, insert poll) - "the sandbox" is ultimately not meant for the playstyle of lulling in security, and that's a major playstyle not included
Personally I would, at this stage of the game, look really close at including some highsec safety measures. It would totally change the game but it might help against the inevitable stagnation. The game needs to evolve in order to keep it running. Realistically highsec is already fairly safe, and the playstyle of "building up" is much more represented than "griefing". Eve needs to attract new players. The sandbox would not be contracted because of artificial limitations, but expanded because of introducing a large new playstyle of no-risk that is represented by many players who can't have it in the current sandbox. |
Valei Khurelem
439
|
Posted - 2012.03.16 09:34:00 -
[210] - Quote
I think what needs to be looked at is making it so that in EVE you can completely avoid griefing if you use common sense, scams for instance are a perfect example of EVE working as it should, yes you get people trying to trick you, but if you read the contract properly and be careful then it's actually fairly easy to avoid being scammed.
When it comes to wardec mechanics etc. however this type of thing is clearly broken and if we are going say it's okay to gank small corporations just for 'lulz' then we need to give newbies legitimate ways of fighting back. Just shrugging and going "If you don't like it this game isn't for you" is just a pathetic excuse not to actually find a way to fix all this.
For instance one daft thing I've been seeing is many forum posters here whining about high security, people stay in high security because 0.0 and low sec offer nothing but ganking, there are no good incentives to get out there, I tried starting out as a noob in 0.0 space and it was ridiculous.
"don't get us wrong, we don't want to screw new players, on the contrary. The core problem here is that tech 1 frigates and cruisers should be appealing enough to be viable platforms in both PvE and PvP." -á - CCP Ytterbium |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |