| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Squids
25696
   |
Posted - 2015.10.12 12:21:40 -
[1] - Quote
Sugar Kyle wrote:My belief is simple. If a player wishes to live in high sec, I do not believe that anything will make them leave that is not their own curiosity. I do not believe that we can beat people out of high sec or destroy it until they go to other areas of space. Sometimes, I think we forget that every player has the option to not log back in. We want them to log in. We want everyone to log in.
Hi Sugar,
The player who does not log in because hisec is not safe is a player we would have lost eventually anyway.
Hisec being safe removes content. People log into the game, long term, because of content. I don't think I need to convince you of CCP Quant's and CCP Rise's studies which find this statement to be true.
The people you think you are saving contribute only to wrecking the EVE market as a whole (creation without destruction). Destruction, mayhem, PVP, these are all hallmarks of EVE. These elements are what make EVE unique, and what make people continue to log in. The second that we coddle folks who let a thing like "undocking not being safe" be a valid reason for quitting, that is when we start selling EVE short.
I voted for you in CSM and I love what you're doing, but please don't cater to these people. They are not long term EVE players. They're not CCP's bread and butter.
The only question that I think you should ask is this: How do I get more content into hisec? Content is destruction, adversity, danger.
And I wish I could shout you out
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Squids
25696
|
Posted - 2015.10.12 12:24:33 -
[2] - Quote
Ima GoodGirl wrote:Sort of related to the wardec idea I posted back on page 1 or 2, but even simpler. Article by Steve Ronuken: https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/2015/10/11/solving-the-wardec-problem/
Fits with the concept of not changing the risk balance in wardecs. Wardec Corps can continue to do what they do and defenders will have a reason to login and a goal to aim for.
Everyone who logs into the game should be subject to a wardec. That's the only way to fix the system,
And I wish I could shout you out
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Squids
25698
|
Posted - 2015.10.12 12:44:40 -
[3] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:One day, Sybbil, CCP will tell us how many assets are disabled from game economy as their owners leave, and how many are destroyed by player activity.
My gut feeling is that they're at least 3:1 ratio (3 ISK disabled vs 1 ISK destroyed).
Indy, can you tell me what the importance is of assets that were amassed never intended to be destroyed in-game?
Even if that player were subscribed and logged in, how would any of these assets contribute to:
- Interaction
- The destruction-creation economy
- Long term fun
And I wish I could shout you out
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Squids
25700
|
Posted - 2015.10.12 14:55:17 -
[4] - Quote
Consumption:
Indy, we already established in your ammo threadnaught that PVE ammo consumption was a drop in the bucket compared to PVP ammo consumption.
And as far as ships destroyed go.. PVE ships get destroyed? Not as much ISK as you lose in PVP. See ISK destroyed by CODEdot.
And I wish I could shout you out
|
Sibyyl
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Squids
25713
|
Posted - 2015.10.12 16:29:03 -
[5] - Quote
Arthur Hannigen wrote:Even assuming that there is a zero-sum contribution to interaction, destruction-creation economy, and long term fun (as you listed above), I still would prefer no interaction + $14.95 towards the game than no interaction + $0.00 towards the game. A subscription is a contribution.
CCP Quant and CCP Rise have found that the no-interaction playerbase have the greatest chance of leaving the game.
That $14.95 from them is temporary, and their needs don't contribute to any long term survivability of the game.
Indy is now sharing pictures of girls. Nice 
And I wish I could shout you out
|
| |
|