Time to step up the ganking.

Thought the PvP thing was "Why they subbed" and not "What they mostly do"

Thought the PvP thing was "Why they subbed" and not "What they mostly do"

Or CCP can take 75% of their income and donate it to fund therapy for recovering kb-humpers. Same effect.

No, it just means CCP is so caught up in pleasing a small percentage of their player base, when clearly there is a larger portion that wants more PvE aspects added. I bet if CCP were to really do something about adding WiS and more PvE elements, this games subs would go through the roof.

Yep, but it wouldn't be EVE anymore. And I wouldn't be playing it.

No, it just means CCP is so caught up in pleasing a small percentage of their player base, when clearly there is a larger portion that wants more PvE aspects added. I bet if CCP were to really do something about adding WiS and more PvE elements, this games subs would go through the roof.

Yep, but it wouldn't be EVE anymore. And I wouldn't be playing it.

Well see, CCP did not make this game to placate only a small portion of the gaming community. I bet CCP wants to make tons of money. Your few dollars would mean squat if they gained 10k players.

Except that the only thing keeping this game from falling on its face is the player generated content aka nullsec. EVE is built around nullsec. Everything, until recently, existed to support nullsec and gently nudge players towards it.

Then all is a lie and this game is as linear as any other. Time to abandon all illusions of choice, limited as they were and abandon ship then?

Except that the only thing keeping this game from falling on its face is the player generated content aka nullsec. EVE is built around nullsec. Everything, until recently, existed to support nullsec and gently nudge players towards it.

Yep, but it wouldn't be EVE anymore. And I wouldn't be playing it.

No, it just means CCP is so caught up in pleasing a small percentage of their player base, when clearly there is a larger portion that wants more PvE aspects added. I bet if CCP were to really do something about adding WiS and more PvE elements, this games subs would go through the roof.

It's hard to PvP and surf pron at the same time

Yep, but it wouldn't be EVE anymore. And I wouldn't be playing it.

It's hard to PvP and surf pron at the same time

If all the people in null-sec left, others would move in and take their place. The game is not all about null-sec. Never has been. It is because of this fact that a few. like yourself that whine and moan about the rest of the game, that the rest of the game is constantly being shelved to address a small percentage of players. There are more people playing than just you - remember that....many, many, many, more.

If all the people in null-sec left, others would move in and take their place. The game is not all about null-sec. Never has been. It is because of this fact that a few. like yourself that whine and moan about the rest of the game, that the rest of the game is constantly being shelved to address a small percentage of players. There are more people playing than just you - remember that....many, many, many, more.

Somebody only read the thread title.

Huzzah for you, sir!

We've seen your hi sec community in action with the recent incursion nerf.

"We're a vital and relevant roleplaying community CCP and the bonds we've forged will endure through time"

--1 nerf later--

"ISK/hr for incursion not good enough I'm gonna solo level 4s again"

Yep. You guys totally have the drive, determination, and skill it takes to build a nullsec empire. You only complain about it because nullsec is too hard for you because it would require you to form real connections with other people and actually fight for something.

We've seen your hi sec community in action with the recent incursion nerf.

"We're a vital and relevant roleplaying community CCP and the bonds we've forged will endure through time"

--1 nerf later--

"ISK/hr for incursion not good enough I'm gonna solo level 4s again"

Yep. You guys totally have the drive, determination, and skill it takes to build a nullsec empire. You only complain about it because nullsec is too hard for you because it would require you to form real connections with other people and actually fight for something.

OMG - null-sec is for a few people that live eat and breath EVE. That is the truth of the matter. There are far more pople that play this game on a more casual basis. They are not interested in holding territories. They just want to play a sci-fi game. EVE is one of the only really decent sci-fi games out right now. If another triple AAA - good sci-fi game - was on the market - that had the same sandbox qualites - EVE would die.

Nullsec is the purest part of the EVE sandbox.

75% of characters if I remember right

There are more people playing than just you - remember that....many, many, many, more.

i dont know why people think that pve automatically means mining.


Why most people play solo or mostly solo;

1. have you ever tried to do something with a lot of people in this game. It takes forever just to form up let alone run a sweep of lowsec or spent hours station camping/gate camping. If its a weekday and you have a job to go to then solo is sometimes the only option.

2. Running missions/nullbearing is always a good way to raise isk

3. If you only have an hour or two to kill then group work is not an option.

4. lots more that i cant remember

You don't.

Unfortunately, there are no hard numbers to that effect.

OMG - null-sec is for a few people that live eat and breath EVE. That is the truth of the matter. There are far more pople that play this game on a more casual basis. They are not interested in holding territories. They just want to play a sci-fi game. EVE is one of the only really decent sci-fi games out right now. If another triple AAA - good sci-fi game - was on the market - that had the same sandbox qualites - EVE would die.

Apparently the survey results indicate that most people do two very naughty things.

1. play solo
2. are pve only.

In fact, only about 1/4 of all players are interested in the pvp aspects of the game.


This is unacceptable.
We obviously aren't trying hard enough to force them into lo sec.

Time to step up the ganking. They resist, but once they lose some hulks and are forced down they'll enjoy the game.

So masternerdguy makes up the majority of all plaeyrs...him...his lone account?

So nullsec is only for hardcore gamers but if there were another game out with a mechanic like nullsec (read: sandbox) it would be wildly popular and kill Eve.

it looks like your pet monkey might be posting again for you.

.... it would require you to form real connections with other people ...

So masternerdguy makes up the majority of all plaeyrs...him...his lone account?

A lot of them just refuse to try other aspects of the game. A girl (omg, a real one too!) in my corp quit EVE last week because all she wants to do is mine solo. She felt she was being forced to play a certain way & wouldn't submit to that. I could not stop laughing.

No...if there were another good sci-fi sandbox game out there. Doesn't even have to have as much PvP as this game has - it would bury EVE.

... like you.

That's what drives me off every time.

You are not, and I repeat not, one of the better features of EVE.

Unlikely, but it's entirely possible that people like him are not a minority or a small percentage of players.

Apparently the survey results indicate that most people do two very naughty things.

1. play solo
2. are pve only.

In fact, only about 1/4 of all players are interested in the pvp aspects of the game.


This is unacceptable.
We obviously aren't trying hard enough to force them into lo sec.

Time to step up the ganking. They resist, but once they lose some hulks and are forced down they'll enjoy the game.

No...if there were another good sci-fi sandbox game out there. Doesn't even have to have as much PvP as this game has - it would bury EVE.

Unlikely, but it's entirely possible that people like him are not a minority or a small percentage of players.

Oh my, another person who thinks a sandbox is some kind of ultraliberal hippie "be anything you want to be whenever you feel like it" dream.

Fun fact: The real world, where you have a job and taxes, is a pure sandbox. You *can* do anything, but you must acquire the prerequisite capital (resources), team (friends), and knowledge (science) to do it.

Nullsec is the closest you can get to the real world in EVE.

unlikely given 75% of ppl are in high sec

Why does someones play style infringe on your play style. I'll never understand this. These open ended games were meant to play as the player wishes to play it. If she was paying for her sub, let her play as she wishes to.

GǪexcept that 75% of people are not in highsec.

We've seen your hi sec community in action with the recent incursion nerf.

"We're a vital and relevant roleplaying community CCP and the bonds we've forged will endure through time"

--1 nerf later--

"ISK/hr for incursion not good enough I'm gonna solo level 4s again"

Yep. You guys totally have the drive, determination, and skill it takes to build a nullsec empire. You only complain about it because nullsec is too hard for you because it would require you to form real connections with other people and actually fight for something.

If I want the real world, I'll turn off the "game" and walk out my front door. This is supposedly a game - remember?

If I want the real world, I'll turn off the "game" and walk out my front door. This is supposedly a game - remember?

Interesting... youre saying the CCP that tweeted they were was.... lying then?

Fine. Then admit you are anti-sandbox.

Fine. Then admit you are anti-sandbox.

I'm all for sandbox. The problem is - you are not. You want thegame to revolve around you and your gaming style and forget that there are tons more people playing this game than just you.

I'm all for sandbox. The problem is - you are not. You want thegame to revolve around you and your gaming style and forget that there are tons more people playing this game than just you.

I can never understand this leap of logic.

You seem to think that if people attack you, they are doing so because they don't like your playstyle.

On the contrary!

If they're attacking you, people love your playstyle and probably hope you keep it up!

You don't want a sandbox mate. You want a themepark.

You want to login, and just go have fun with no consequences.

Huh? WTF are you talking about? You are making no sense whatsoever? If you think I am against ganking...LMAO!

Apparently the survey results indicate that most people do two very naughty things.

1. play solo
2. are pve only.

In fact, only about 1/4 of all players are interested in the pvp aspects of the game.

Errr... source? linky?

No, I'm saying that you are.

CCP has never said anything of the kind.

John Turbefield GÇÅ@CCP_Diagoras

Locations of active chars with more than 5m SP just after midnight: High Sec 66.00%, Low sec 7.37%, Null sec 20.73%, Wormhole Space 5.89%

What I think is that you seem to take some in-game action as an attack against your personal playstyle.

Beyond that, I really have no context and couldn't care less.

What I said remains true regardless of your occupation in Eve Online or your personal beliefs.

Why does someones play style infringe on your play style. I'll never understand this. These open ended games were meant to play as the player wishes to play it. If she was paying for her sub, let her play as she wishes to.

lying... what? Yeah you

Wow...just wow...you are wankers. Your mindless drivel is just that - mindless. You make little to no sense. YOur comments are from left field. Maybe you played a bit to much rugby as a child huh?

What I think is that you seem to take some in-game action as an attack against your personal playstyle.

Beyond that, I really have no context and couldn't care less.

What I said remains true regardless of your occupation in Eve Online or your personal beliefs.

Yes you.

It wasn't 75% and, as always, it wasn't players. So no, [whatever]% of players are not in highsec.

By the way, do you have an actual source for that?

Technically speaking, Tippia, [whatever]% of players are, by necessity, in high-sec.

Fine. The point I'm making is that as soon as you see someone make a claim where that [whatever] is replaced with an actual number, you can be sure that they've made it up since no such number has ever been presented.

In particular, it's a rather silly mistake to believe that GÇ£charactersGÇ¥ equates to GÇ£peopleGÇ¥.

Yes you.

It wasn't 75% and, as always, it wasn't players. So no, [whatever]% of players are not in highsec.

By the way, do you have an actual source for that quote?

John Turbefield GÇÅ@CCP_Diagoras

Locations of active chars with more than 5m SP just after midnight: High Sec 66.00%, Low sec 7.37%, Null sec 20.73%, Wormhole Space 5.89%
Collapse

Reply
Retweet
Favorite

8:12 AM - 29 Feb 12 via web -+ Details

[quote=Disregard That]The point I'm making is that as soon as you see someone make a claim where that [whatever] is replaced with an actual number.

Yeah twitter.
use His name and scroll down...

But yeah.... cause CCP_diagoras, TOTALLY not CCP

Your reaching now

When its CCP doing it....

When its CCP doing it....

Unless you dont believe them either then yeah, like I said; Tippia tinfoil best tinfoil

You can link to individual tweets, you knowGǪ

Not really, no, because the simple fact remains: CCP never said what you claimed they said. 75% of players (or 66% if you so like) are not in higsec.

GǪexcept that they're not, and even they would have problem finding out the number of players in highsec.

John Turbefield GÇÅ@CCP_Diagoras

Locations of active chars with more than 5m SP just after midnight: High Sec 66.00%, Low sec 7.37%, Null sec 20.73%, Wormhole Space 5.89%
Collapse

Reply
Retweet
Favorite

8:12 AM - 29 Feb 12 via web -+ Details

Yeah twitter.
use His name and scroll down...

https://twitter.com/#!/CCP_Diagoras

29 february

There for all to read, but I dont do twitter so I dont know how to link it :p

But yeah.... cause CCP_diagoras, TOTALLY not CCP

Your reaching now

(pssst? Last post I said "oops it was 66% not 75% so yeah cram it lol)

Keep lying Tippia

It doesn't matter. The whole context of the survey just illuminates ignorance as to what Eve is: PVP.

Dont' be silly, if EVE is a sandbox then it's what players make of it. If it's over 50% solo PvE then it's a PvE game.

In reality, all that's happened is that a whole lot of PvE players are playing EVE because it's the only s-f game in town. It looks great, and it's rich and complex with many ladders of achievement. At best, most of the PvE-ers who play it are reconciled to the "danger" of being violenced by PvP.

IOW, the shenanigans you PvP dudes get up to just give a background sense of aliveness to the game for the rest of us

Oh, and, it's only a game ...

Unlikely, but it's entirely possible that people like him are not a minority or a small percentage of players.

If it were truly a PVE game because sandboxes are a democracy and a majority are only interested in PVE, then nobody would be getting ganked in high-sec or low-sec or null-sec because, alas, the game is PVE content by popular demand.

Sandbox != Democracy.

Nice try though, really.

This is what happens in the seedier part of the town. See how the human trash gets left behind, and become a feature around these parts?

Yes you.

It wasn't 75% and, as always, it wasn't players. So no, [whatever]% of players are not in highsec.

By the way, do you have an actual source for that quote?

Yep, but it wouldn't be EVE anymore. And I wouldn't be playing it.

What is even funnier is that the vast majority of PvP is taking place now in high-sec rather than low and null sec. RvB makes up the most. RvB is like the casual version of PvP. You don't have to live EVE in order to enjoy some PvP.

Who said anything about democracy?

Here are a bunch of tools, which include PvE elements and PvP elements. There's your sandbox. If it so happens that the majority of players who play the game pick up the PvE tools and don't use the PvP tools, if that forms the majority of the activity in the game, then it's a PvE game by function. (Incidentally, to forestall a certain line of criticism, it should be obvious that ships are lost in PvE too.)

IOW, the sandbox was created with a mixture of PvE and PvP activities possible in it, and lo and behold, it turns out that most of the people who come into the game play it as a casual solo PvE game. (Possibly - I dunno if that's actually true, just arguing the point, but it seems about right since every other MMORPG is like that too - most subs are from casuals, and most casuals are soloers.)

The fact that the PvP element of "danger" is always present even for PvE-ers is then merely a result of a minority of players picking up the PvP tools in the sandbox and playing with them.

And that's perfectly ok, since it's a sandbox

Accounts != players != characters.

What is even funnier is that the vast majority of PvP is taking place now in high-sec rather than low and null sec. RvB makes up the most. RvB is like the casual version of PvP. You don't have to live EVE in order to enjoy some PvP.

And the snapshot shows activity...

Are you denying that there are more people in Hi-sec now? There is very little way to parse the numbers, when the numbers are so sparse...

What with the markets and the contracts and the belt mining and the belt rats, it seems self-evident that most of the PVP in Eve happens in high-sec. Trade volumes alone indicate a massive amount of PVP happens there daily.

Just not according to the carebear's narrow dogmatic view.

Post with your frikken main...

That's not the source of the quote GÇö that's a different point of comparison saying roughly the same thing (which still isn't that any specific percentage of players are in highsec).

Since the numbers won't really tell anything new and interesting, I was mainly wondering about the date to see which way the numbers were heading.

I would if I could?

POINT!

Apparently the survey results indicate that most people do two very naughty things.

1. play solo
2. are pve only.

In fact, only about 1/4 of all players are interested in the pvp aspects of the game.


This is unacceptable.
We obviously aren't trying hard enough to force them into lo sec.

Time to step up the ganking. They resist, but once they lose some hulks and are forced down they'll enjoy the game.

Statistics - all in the interpretation.

That's not the source of the quote GÇö that's a different point of comparison saying roughly the same thing (which still isn't that any specific percentage of players are in highsec).

Since the numbers won't really tell anything new and interesting, I was mainly wondering about the date to see which way the numbers were heading.

No, it shows character locations at the time of the data collection.
What he and I are saying is that the amount of people in highsec is unknowable and that trying to extrapolate them from something as unrelated as a character count will be so inherently unreliable that, yes, it could very well be that highsec has a minority of the players.

Also, if you listen further, he states that the number one activity in EVE is PvE - mission running.

Also, if you listen further, he states that the number one activity in EVE is PvE - mission running.

We've seen your hi sec community in action with the recent incursion nerf.

"We're a vital and relevant roleplaying community CCP and the bonds we've forged will endure through time"

--1 nerf later--

"ISK/hr for incursion not good enough I'm gonna solo level 4s again"

Yep. You guys totally have the drive, determination, and skill it takes to build a nullsec empire. You only complain about it because nullsec is too hard for you because it would require you to form real connections with other people and actually fight for something.

A lot of them just refuse to try other aspects of the game. A girl (omg, a real one too!) in my corp quit EVE last week because all she wants to do is mine solo. She felt she was being forced to play a certain way & wouldn't submit to that. I could not stop laughing.

Yeah look, concerning the bolded bit up there, I have a job and a family. I'm the boss all day and I only have between one and three hours to log on to Eve for some fun and laughs. Tore down the hisec POS because feeding it got to be like a job. Damned if I'm gonna burn too many IQ points doing personnel, logistics and accounting work when I log on.
If that's what you enjoy, or need to feel like you're significant, go for it. I'm playing Eve for fun and the srs bsnss pvppppppers often strike me as a tragic minority of douches. The CSM is loaded with em so they can vent their frustrations maybe?

Actually listen to what is said by the man on stage during fanfest. Those are unique "players". He doesn't characters.

Also, if you listen further, he states that the number one activity in EVE is PvE

I believe Turbfelds tweet was the source, taken from the Fan Fest presentation.

Yeah look, concerning the bolded bit up there, I have a job and a family. I'm the boss all day and I only have between one and three hours to log on to Eve for some fun and laughs. Tore down the hisec POS because feeding it got to be like a job. Damned if I'm gonna burn too many IQ points doing personnel, logistics and accounting work when I log on.
If that's what you enjoy, or need to feel like you're significant, go for it. I'm playing Eve for fun and the srs bsnss pvppppppers often strike me as a tragic minority of douches. The CSM is loaded with em so they can vent their frustrations maybe?

That's not the source of the quote GÇö that's a different point of comparison saying roughly the same thing (which still isn't that any specific percentage of players are in highsec).

Since the numbers won't really tell anything new and interesting, I was mainly wondering about the date to see which way the numbers were heading.

No, it shows character locations at the time of the data collection.
What he and I are saying is that the amount of people in highsec is unknowable and that trying to extrapolate them from something as unrelated as a character count will be so inherently unreliable that, yes, it could very well be that highsec has a minority of the players.

No, it was this, which came out a month before EyjoG's presentation, thus showing that the number of highsec characters was actually going downGǪ

Yeah you really didn't address anything there no offense. One doesn't have to lead a community to be a part of it. For every "Dynamic Leader" and "Heroic Logistics Team" there are a dozen guys who just play when they can, chill out and are active members of the community who add to it by simply being there.

The fact that the "Incursion Community" couldn't survive a punchdown in payouts that brought it about even with mission running just shows that it was never a "Community". Just a means to an end. There is nothing embarrassing about it. Our incursion SIG (Special Interest Group) literally keeled over and died with the changes, and we were doing them in low. We were there for the money, when the money dried up to the point where doing anoms in our home space was a similar enough payout not to justify living out of our carriers, we went home.

Oh and I think they got hit too hard as well. But that's neither here nor there.

What he and I are saying is that the amount of people in highsec is unknowable and that trying to extrapolate them from something as unrelated as a character count will be so inherently unreliable that, yes, it could very well be that highsec has a minority of the players.

Unless you want to take it up with Dr EyjoG?

I wonder if the Incursion code is irrespective of security rating of the system?

It seems like the risk vs. reward should scale up.

If low/null Incursions pay the same as high-sec's, that's really a horse of a different color.

Personally, I feel high-sec Incursions were hit quite rightly.

The first chart that shows around 70% is a "Population" count; the chart with the 66% is a "Character above 5m sp" count.

But both 70% and 66% are still a "majority", and it's pretty clear that the presenter is talking in terms of players. The first charts are titled "Where in the world do people live?"

Unless you want to take it up with Dr EyjoG?

Oh hey: Knowledge that I can post on!

Highsec incursions did pay less, but the complete lack or risk allowed for fitting and optimization that made them pay out far more than a group doing lowsec incursions could make if they were to fit prudent to their situations due to the speed at which they could be run.

The name of the game in lowsec incursions was HAC's and T3's that way you were moderately nimble, well tanked and small sigged running with at least 3 logi's. This was pretty much how they had to be run in null and low because tangling with pirates wasn't something that "May" happen. It was something that simply was going to happen.

I didn't go to a single incursion where we didn't fight off a gang or lose members of the incursion group to gangs that successfully jumped us.

If we were to run the big Mach/Vindi etc etc etc gangs like the highsec people were: We'd have been murdered in very expensive ships due to the giant sigs.

Actually - it seems that this is the best accounting of players (as Dr E stated) that we're going to get.

Is there slop here? Yeah, but it gives an overall view of player locations. If players weren't on the toons doing whatever, they wouldn't be active in that space to be counted.

So, once again, we're either arguing semantics (who should be counted in which group) or arguing that the numbers aren't detailed enough, when in fact, there *is* enough information to at least make a reasonable guess...

But both 70% and 66% are still a "majority", and it's pretty clear that the presenter is talking in terms of players. The first charts are titled "Where in the world do people live?"

Unless you want to take it up with Dr EyjoG?

This is quite insightful. Quite insightful, indeed.

So what this means is that, typically, low and null Incursions pay less reward for their relative risk than high-sec Incursions?

Yeah, maybe they were hit too hard. But not in high-sec.

How would you differentiate between my Carrier pilot who spends most of his time in low and my subcap dude who spends most of his time in null (And admittedly sometimes low)? The only real way to find out of I'm a guy who likes roaming nullsec but makes my home in low is to ask me. I have ships spread all over hell so even looking at my primary accumulation of assets won't work. Especially since I still have most of my incursion staging crap in the bowels of lowsec.

Also the thought that CCP has a reporting tool competent enough to make these distinctions is laughable. We're talking about "Zee logs show nothing!" CCP here.

From my understanding if you discount combat losses and compared a straight "Isk per hour" assuming you were single boxing: Highsec incursions were making about 10-20M an hour more than those of us in lowsec with absolutely no risk. Bear in mind that my own knowledge of isk per hour in highsec is mainly second hand here. On average WE were netting about 90-100m an hour, mainly dependent on how many newbee's in hurricanes we were letting in :v

Well, it's a case of, if you can pull numbers out of your ass that are likely to be more accurate, be my guest, but until you do so, I think I'll just believe what the game's economist tells me, that 70-ish percent of PEOPLE play in High-Sec.

Somehow I think they are able to factor multiple accounts and all the rest of it into their calculations - I should think they probably have information about IPs and credit cards

Well, it's a case of, if you can pull numbers out of your ass that are likely to be more accurate, be my guest, but until you do so, I think I'll just believe what the game's economist tells me, that 70-ish percent of PEOPLE play in High-Sec.

Somehow I think they are able to factor multiple accounts and all the rest of it into their calculations - I should think they probably have information about IPs and credit cards

who'll say that both charts are counting characters, because that's what they always count and why he's comparing them: one shows all characters; the other shows non-newbie characters (newbie being defined as having less than 5M SP).

[quote=Barbelo Valentinian]They probably could, but they don't. If they did, they would have been able to present Gǣaccounts per playerGǥ stats along with the Gǣcharacters per accountGǥ stats they produceGǪ but the thing is that they never do.

n addition, it would still be methodologically unsound, since credit card + IP doesn't necessarily equates to GÇ£a playerGÇ¥.

Tippia, take from it what you will (hell, I know a hi-sec player who at one time ran 26 accounts, all in hi-sec - there will always be statistical flyers) the snapshots show a consistent trend - as you say, it would be a logistical nightmare to know where all the players are. But given a long enough time frame and the numbers remaining somewhat consistent year to year, character activity is the best information we have. vOv

To get back to the OP (and my point) Null sec'ers need to do a better job of recruiting and supporting new players if they want them to leave hi-sec.

Bottom line.

Yeah look: I know my way around a database, and I'm telling you right now that CCP does not have a nice pat query that is going to tell them that kind of information without some pretty ******* hefty guessing and interpretation. Mainly for the reasons I stated.

Once again.

I have two characters. One is sitting in lowsec: most of his assets are in lowsec.

The other is sitting in Nullsec: most of his assets are in nullsec.

Now lets pretend my alliance is one of those that floats between NPC null and Low.

Am I a nullsec player, or a lowsec player?

Surely common sense tells you that the type of player who'd go to the effort of hiding things that much is going to be relatively rare. It wouldn't bias the numbers that much, certainly not enough to change a substantial majority into a minority.

So the title of the chart, which refers to "People", is bollocks then?

I admire your ongoing defence of the PvP functionality of the game, but EVE does also have PvE "sand", and if the majority of players are playing with the PvE sand and not the PvP sand (except indirectly), then so be it.

Tippia, take from it what you will (hell, I know a hi-sec player who at one time ran 26 accounts, all in hi-sec - there will always be statistical flyers) the snapshots show a consistent trend - as you say, it would be a logistical nightmare to know where all the players are. But given a long enough time frame and the numbers remaining somewhat consistent year to year, character activity is the best information we have. vOv

Which are you more active on?

We've seen your hi sec community in action with the recent incursion nerf.

"We're a vital and relevant roleplaying community CCP and the bonds we've forged will endure through time"

--1 nerf later--

"ISK/hr for incursion not good enough I'm gonna solo level 4s again"

Yep. You guys totally have the drive, determination, and skill it takes to build a nullsec empire. You only complain about it because nullsec is too hard for you because it would require you to form real connections with other people and actually fight for something.

As luck would have it, the majority of players are playing with the PvP sand.

Apparently the survey results indicate that most people do two very naughty things.

1. play solo
2. are pve only.

In fact, only about 1/4 of all players are interested in the pvp aspects of the game.


This is unacceptable.
We obviously aren't trying hard enough to force them into lo sec.

Time to step up the ganking. They resist, but once they lose some hulks and are forced down they'll enjoy the game.

If 75 percent of players didn't sub for PVP and the devs estimate that 70 percent of characters reside in high sec, then the two numbers are close enough to know you're in the ballpark.

The devs have said repeatedly that the overwhelming majority of players live in high sec. You can try to spin that to mean what you want, and you're giving it such a sincere try that it's kind of heartbreaking. You just don't want to believe the facts.

Seventy percent is considerably lower than the QEN estimates. Those data were based on snapshots of actual players and where they were at given times, meaning players who were actually logged on and playing. That was my understanding, anyway. Since only one player can be logged on per account. then the two numbers were the same in terms of the QEN. I'm going by memory though and I could be wrong.

And your basis for that is ... ?

Apparently the survey results indicate that most people do two very naughty things.

1. play solo
2. are pve only.

In fact, only about 1/4 of all players are interested in the pvp aspects of the game.


This is unacceptable.
We obviously aren't trying hard enough to force them into lo sec.

Time to step up the ganking. They resist, but once they lose some hulks and are forced down they'll enjoy the game.

Now? The nullsec guy. But when Incursions didn't suck I was in lowsec most of the time. But all of that money was being funneled back into nullsec.

This is why that categorization is inherently broken. It pretends people don't bounce between the sec's on a regular basis.

You're expecting an EVE player to be able to read charts correctly? Really now.

Name activities that players can participate in that aren't PVP in Eve online.

Let's see.

1) Ship spinning
2) WiC (Walking in Closets)

Yep.

That's some compelling non-pvp content, let me tell you!

Sillyness :) having experienced players from many online games, i suggest eve actually supports some of the more well educated neck-beards of the world. Long as you stear well clear of general discussion..

Gotta love how the word "pvp" can be manipulated to suit your argument.

You say "pvp" is everything you do in eve(selling/buying, minerals, chatting, etc) when it comes to poll results
At the same time you also say that pvp only counts when blowing up player ships and that others should do the same

Bloody hypocrites, you are like those feminists with double standards.

The only reason bears can't/don't is because bears think the default state of Eve gameplay is "AFK".

Autopiloting takes forever when you're AFK.

Actually, you're either lying or you suck at reading comprehension.

Tweet says: Active CHARACTERS not PLAYERS. Those are 2 very different things.

Also, I believe from Tippia's POV, what he/she/it/?? means by Hi-sec players refers to highsec ONLY players. The proportion of players that reside exclusively in Hi-sec would, by any logic, be lower than the 66% (NOT 75%) quoted.

tl;dr. Stop lying

Thats nitpicking at best, they are still active subscribers regardless.

If the majority of the active subscribers are in high sec, regardless if their "mains" are in null/low then clearly the majority enjoy high sec more.

Oh, and no, it doesn't follow that the majority enjoys highsec more.

There's nothing in the numbers that suggests anything about enjoyment.

But a quick glance at the map any time will show you where the active characters are.

It's not nitpicking. It's a critical distinction: it means they're not counting players or accounts, but something that can distributed completely freely without any connection to where said players actually spend their time.

GǪand that's just it: GǣifGǥ. There is nothing in the numbers to suggest that. Oh, and no, it doesn't follow that the majority enjoys highsec more.

Exactly.

GǪand as always, that's characters, not players. Any analysis that ignores the distinction is equally obtuse.

Now you are twisting my words. "If as in results show" now "If the results show"

"Active characters" is "not counting players or accounts" ? What ?

You are under assumption that those 66% are just "visiting" highsec to buy stuff

Go check the map and see which space has more orange. It will always be highsec regardless of when you check it.

You can try as much as you want Tippia you can't make some admit the difference in between active players and active characters.

It's like saying we have 50K players online when actually over 50% have at least one alt (some up to 20+)

Exactly.

GǪand as always, that's characters, not players. Any analysis that ignores the distinction is equally obtuse.

If a character is anywhere, a player put them there. The location of active characters is a direct reflection of the volition of players.

Characters on active accounts is not the same thing as active characters (I have characters on my active account that haven't been used in months), nor is it the same thing as active accounts (I have three characters on this account), or the same thing as a a player (GǪand who knows how many accounts I have).

The population distribution of characters on active accounts cannot trivially be translated into player distribution because there is no way to know which location is the GÇ£correctGÇ¥ one. I'll use this example again: a player has two accounts. He has filled out every slot on those accounts with characters. Four of the six characters are parked in the four empire trade hubs; one character is parked in a lowsec system to be used as an instant cyno; the last, main, character is in null, because this is a nullsec player.


GǪand will still count characters, not players.

Tbh, the way people refuse to distinguish between characters, accounts, and players feels more like the GÇ£CCP says there are 400k players, so why are there only 40k online, huh, huh, huh?!GÇ¥ level of critical thinking failure you see every now and then.

CCP took data from active characters, character is obviously not classed as "active" if you don't log in as him/her on your account.

You can have all the characters you want, anywhere you want, but they are not active unless they are online in game.

You are saying "Average Pilots in Space in the last 30 Minutes" means "Inactive character on the active account of some player whose other character on the same account is elsewhere" ? Seriously ?

GǪbut it is not a reflection of where the players are or what part of space the players think of as GÇ£homeGÇ¥. You're still not making the distinction between character distribution and player distribution GÇö here, you are rather trying to erase that distinction by claiming that the two are the same.

The players "are" where they put their characters.

f I'm playing three characters at once and all three are in null, I'm in null. If two are in Empire

People see that the ice cream shop has more people, they assume that more people like ice cream and that less people want to buy toys.

Nullsec is the purest part of the EVE sandbox.

No, they're not, for the simple reason that you can place your characters all over the place and still only really play in one location, and the numbers will not reflect this.

Character distribution is character distribution. Player distribution is where the players spend their time playing. The two are separate things. Translating one to the other is indeed quite complex and cannot be done automatically GÇö it requires the player's input to designate what space is GÇ£theirsGÇ¥; it requires complete knowledge about which characters belong to which accounts, and which accounts belong to which players; and it results in a mapping that can turn any character distribution into a vastly different player distribution mapping (again, see the example above, where 66% highsec characters GåÆ 100% nullsec players).

GǪthen you might be in null, or you might be in empire, or you might be in both. The numbers can't tell the difference. All the numbers can show is where there are characters. They do not show what the players are doing with those characters. They do not show which character is the main character. They do not show where the players GǣliveGǥ.

Moreover, the numbers do not tell that it's you who are behind those three characters. All they show is that there are three of them. So even your first case isn't as clear-cut as you want to make it: if there are three characters in null, then it tells us absolutely squat about where the player(s) are or even how many of them there are.

This is a good idea, we'll take it under advisement.

The only thing that's measurable is the will of the players which is reflected in the play of the characters. The characters are where the players want them to be.

Except that the only thing keeping this game from falling on its face is the player generated content aka nullsec. EVE is built around nullsec. Everything, until recently, existed to support nullsec and gently nudge players towards it.

So an active character doesn't count as playing.

Uh, if if I have a character in Null and a character in Empire, I have a character in Null and a character in Empire.

It doesn't matter who's behind the character.

Not that anyone could show that to begin with.

Translation: I indeed affirm and swear I cannot cut it in nullsec.

I bet you used to do vanguards.