| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
1068
   |
Posted - 2017.03.29 11:48:29 -
[1] - Quote
Bjorn Tyrson wrote:Quote:
Just remember, a few little bee's may not harm a big bad bear but a swarm of little bee's will definitely chase a big bad bear away.
Death by a thousand stings.
DMC
Yes. This precisely. This is what allows the newbros to fight back. And yet they never do.
Trite - unless a new player comes in via one of the entities like Reddit and SA, etc. they probably don't have the kind of support network to make that anything but a soundbite.
As per the other thread I posted in - after talking to a few people who quit the game early on due to being ganked or losing stuff in a similar fashion in most cases it wasn't the act of being ganked that turned them away as I had first thought but that they found there was no meaningful way in most cases to even attempt to exact revenge. In some cases the lack of tools to better understand the dangers was also cited. |
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
1068
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 13:00:13 -
[2] - Quote
While I'd agree that griefing isn't driving away a large number of people who try the game out - IMO it is also not an insignificant factor amongst those that don't persist with the game - between people I know IRL and a couple of other forums I frequent I've associated with a good number of people who have tried the game. A good number have stuck with it but being the victim of griefing is one of the more common themes with those that haven't.
Given that social behaviour is one of the biggest indices I'm surprised they haven't invested more into getting people working together more earlier on - many people won't immediately jump into a corp or might not even want to be involved with a corp but might still want to work with other players to some degree. |
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
1068
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 15:35:10 -
[3] - Quote
Mr Mieyli wrote:Wardecs really are nothing more than the lowest risk pvp in the game. That's why they don't want wardecs to go anywhere.
You guys are wedged into your closed mindset, literally any attempt to address the reasons eve doesn't have wide popularity is met with 'GTFO, eve is not for you'.
Either remove wardecs or remove highsec so a new player at least knows what to expect on arrival.
Wardecs have very mixed impact - those I've been involved with off the top of my head went something like:
-Other party declared war - nothing happened whatsoever.
-Corp I was in declared war to take down a POS, after RFing it the victims hired a merc corp, most people in my corp suddenly decided they were busy doing something else :( POS was saved.
-We declared war - targets all left corp
-Other party declared war - everyone in my corp went inactive until it was over
-Other party declared war - we got good fights particularly memorial one where we had a megathron fleet slugging it out with their rokhs - we got the upper hand and they eventually conceded.
-Other party declared war - **** happened they ended up with everything they owned razed to the ground
-Other party declared war - nothing really happened - few people chased each other around highsec without result and the odd miner died who hadn't been paying attention to what was going on in corp. |
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
1069
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 16:09:03 -
[4] - Quote
Vigirr wrote:
No you're trying to have conflict removed from your personal play style.
Mind you one way or another that can be applied to 99% of the people posting :s very few want an actual even playing field without the odds tipped in their favour.
If I had it my way I'd make is so that attacking parties in non-consensual PVP in highsec meant that for a certain duration (maybe not as long as the kill right lasts) they couldn't leave highsec, can't log off in a station or other structure they don't own and if they log off their pod and/or ship stays in space forcing the use of targettable POSes or aggressor corp owned citadels :O (or atleast means they'd have to accept getting their pod blown up).
(As a side effect this would also make the bounty system kind of work though potentially leave some players open to griefing if there wasn't some kind of cooldown period). |
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
1070
|
Posted - 2017.03.30 10:15:20 -
[5] - Quote
Black Pedro wrote:Of course it is a good reference point. If the vast majority of players don't make it past 15-days, then you should focus at what happens during those 15 days to try to understand why they are not staying. Numerically, the small percentage that last 16 days but not 30 are irrelevant to the question, and they are probably quite tiny fraction compared to the 15 day cohort given the old trial period was mostly 14 days long. Further, you have no reason, other than perhaps wishful thinking for evidence to validate your own ideas, that 16-30 day quitters would be any different.
Most of the people I know that have quit out of those that I know that have tried it :s have spent between 2 weeks and however long it takes to a get moderately skilled mining barge up and running. Those that quit earlier in nearly every case its because it wasn't the game for them rather than relative to any experience while playing.
While just a small sample those that got ganked after that i.e. when they've had enough time to train up for a machariel tended to stick with the game while those that didn't make it that far before experiencing being ganked (in some cases multiple times) were much more likely to quit. |
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
1071
|
Posted - 2017.03.30 11:01:26 -
[6] - Quote
Black Pedro wrote:Your anecdotes still have a selection bias as it appears you are/were a miner and thus associated with other miners so of course you only hear about players who quit because they were ganked.
At the very least check my killboard before making assumptions :p
|
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
1071
|
Posted - 2017.03.30 12:33:27 -
[7] - Quote
That doesn't mean some mechanics won't become a problem as a game becomes more active or evolves beyond the vision of the original designers. Things that might have worked perfectly well with 4000 players might not pan out anything like the original intention with say 40,000 players online. |
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
1073
|
Posted - 2017.03.30 14:39:33 -
[8] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:
None of the core factors I mention can 'become a problem', they are the basis of the game. If you don't like the basis of a game you don't like the game.
Just like in soccer, the basis of the game is 'don't use your hands' (with a few exceptions like being the goalie). Thinking that playing a ball game without using your hands is stupid as hell is a totally ok opinion to hold....just not while playing soccer.
What? you can't really equate football which also has a set number of players (aside from some casual games) with a video game and even in football they've had some make adjustments to some of the fundamentals over the years as meta has emerged that has come into conflict with the core concept/rules. |
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
1073
|
Posted - 2017.03.30 15:07:21 -
[9] - Quote
It is an interesting one if you really enjoy the overall theme eve is about but your enjoyment is impacted by something like freezing up in combat.
Personally I was like that - the first few times my brain just wasn't processing what was going on in a PVP situation - was quite proud of myself the first fight where I was following the action, overheating modules appropriately, etc. etc. |
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
1073
|
Posted - 2017.03.30 15:32:28 -
[10] - Quote
Mister Tuggles wrote:There should be severe consequences for attacking and destroying non-war targets in high sec.
Instant drop to -10 security status, and a 2-3 second warp delay for all ships while at -10. Old school Ultima online had severe penalties to stats for "going red". Eve should as well.
The warp speed delay would only be applied in high sec.
It would certainly mix things up a bit if there was more penalties for "going red" in highsec - but I'd extend it somewhat to the bounty system and war dec system (for parties on both sides) as well :evilgrin: |
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
1073
|
Posted - 2017.03.30 16:05:03 -
[11] - Quote
Marcus Tedric wrote:
What is really wrong with all those who come to EVE is that they come with no other experience except that of: WoW; Ark; Space Engineers; Star Trek; Star Wars; My Little Pony; & Pokemon. Youngsters who have become self-entitled dolists who know nothing about the real world because they aren't taught anything - the ones who never climbed trees or took childhood risks.
What EVE really needs is a marketing effort that expresses the realism within a game environment - and poses the big question:
'Are you good enough to rise to the challenge of playing EVE Online?'
Again I think this is something that can to a large extent be dealt with by getting players working together earlier on - atleast as an option - partly "safety" in numbers and all that and partly there is a good chance they will end up grouped with someone(s) who can help them to deal with it. I don't think the current starter organisations and corps, etc. entirely cover it sufficiently and in many cases people don't necessarily want to commit to a corp (which can raise expectations of them) before they are ready or know what they want, etc. |
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
1074
|
Posted - 2017.03.30 17:28:01 -
[12] - Quote
Kaely Tanniss wrote:No..Eve needs real players of a game that is played exactly how it's intended. If Eve is such a joke to you..why are you here and what does that say about you? 
lol wouldn't want people able to fight back now would we. |
| |
|