Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Trebor Daehdoow
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 10:31:00 -
[1]
Given the events of recent days, the CSM is overdue for a Fireside Chat. Join us for a free-format Q&A about the May & June Summits -- we'll try to answer your questions in a Fearless manner.
Date: Saturday, July 16 Time: 20:00 EVE Mumble Server: csm6.org (default port, no configuration necessary; server will not be live until 24 hours prior)
Your Humble Servant, Trebor Daehdoow Secretary of the 6th Council of Stellar Management
Posted by Order of His Eminence, The Chairman.
PS: May Summit minutes should be out by the end of the week, they will be required reading.
|
Tiven loves Tansien
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 10:35:00 -
[2]
A song of fire and.. wait what?
I'll be there
|
Mel Civire
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 10:36:00 -
[3]
Recent days?
Is this just about the endless patching of patches on patches of screwing people in the Oceanic region or just the SOE takeover and MT future.
And honestly, you can't do anything against the will of SOE so why bother?
|
Tiven loves Tansien
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 10:38:00 -
[4]
Hey i found it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIysCj8Sh9Q
|
Cashcow Golden Goose
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 10:39:00 -
[5]
There is still a CSM? I thought there was just a Mittani now.
I'm a little bit coked up on lies and propaganda right now I'm afraid I won't be in attendance.
|
AnzacPaul
the united Negative Ten.
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 10:41:00 -
[6]
does csm know how vanity items survive being podkilled? Cause ccp wont answer my thread :(
______ GIGAR; >> The three priorities for CCP after launching Incarna will be
1)launching DUST 514, 2)launching World of Darkness 3)and continuing to improve on EVE. |
Neqa'el Uphir
Amarr PORTAL KOMBAT
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 10:53:00 -
[7]
CSM knows more than CCP, as CCP are clueless (like fearless, just not quite the same). They dont answer questions, CSM does. Everything that CSM says can be later denied, as they are not CCP employees. Meanwhile CCP cant even post a decent informative devblog. So i gues.. 10x CSM?
|
Mel Civire
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 10:55:00 -
[8]
Originally by: AnzacPaul does csm know how vanity items survive being podkilled? Cause ccp wont answer my thread :(
Don't hold your breath waiting for SOE to get back to you.
So is this "chat" just the latest directive from SOE to get us to argue about something, anything not about the last few weeks? Get some attention off SOE and get a couple of wedge issues into the community so we resume the "usual" fighting each other and not them?
|
Trebor Daehdoow
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 11:08:00 -
[9]
Originally by: AnzacPaul does csm know how vanity items survive being podkilled? Cause ccp wont answer my thread :(
They do this because if worn clothing was destructible, nobody would ever undock wearing any NEX-store goods.
And because nullsec folks tend to be in danger of being podded, this means they would not buy fancy monocles, because they would always be putting them on and taking them off -- too much of a pain.
And if CCP decided to address this by making it easy to change clothes (so you had party clothes and work clothes), then apart from the occasional person who forgets to change clothes before undocking, you'd never have an opportunity to grief someone and blow up their monocle anyway.
AFAIK this will not apply to items like ship paintjobs, only to clothes and other bodily adornments.
|
Mel Civire
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 11:14:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
Originally by: AnzacPaul does csm know how vanity items survive being podkilled? Cause ccp wont answer my thread :(
They do this because if worn clothing was destructible, nobody would ever undock wearing any NEX-store goods.
And because nullsec folks tend to be in danger of being podded, this means they would not buy fancy monocles, because they would always be putting them on and taking them off -- too much of a pain.
And if CCP decided to address this by making it easy to change clothes (so you had party clothes and work clothes), then apart from the occasional person who forgets to change clothes before undocking, you'd never have an opportunity to grief someone and blow up their monocle anyway.
AFAIK this will not apply to items like ship paintjobs, only to clothes and other bodily adornments.
Ummmm hello CSM person.
This is EVE from my recollection, the same place my first Retriever was ganked while mining, missions Ninja'ed and been podded quite a bit in null sec.
Why does some rich **** get special treatment for a novelty trinket over my implants?
It is "fair" or just that SOE (CCP) want to train people into the consequence free land of MT?
|
|
Yarrrrrhh
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 11:25:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
Originally by: AnzacPaul does csm know how vanity items survive being podkilled? Cause ccp wont answer my thread :(
They do this because if worn clothing was destructible, nobody would ever undock wearing any NEX-store goods.
That sounds like a very good way to solve all recent problems. Don't let people who buy this crap undock, thus keeping them out of our spaceship game.
It's the perfect solution.
|
Trebor Daehdoow
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 11:34:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Mel Civire Why does some rich **** get special treatment for a novelty trinket over my implants?
I (personally) would argue that the difference is that your implants have in-game effects.
The whole point of the NEX store is to generate income. Non-destructible clothes are almost certainly revenue-optimal. And clearly, non-destructible items cannot be allowed to have in-game effects without breaking the sandbox.
Put all these things together and non-destructibility is the best route for sandbox purists, because it draws a line in the sand, so to speak.
|
AnzacPaul
the united Negative Ten.
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 11:35:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
Originally by: AnzacPaul does csm know how vanity items survive being podkilled? Cause ccp wont answer my thread :(
They do this because if worn clothing was destructible, nobody would ever undock wearing any NEX-store goods.
And because nullsec folks tend to be in danger of being podded, this means they would not buy fancy monocles, because they would always be putting them on and taking them off -- too much of a pain.
And if CCP decided to address this by making it easy to change clothes (so you had party clothes and work clothes), then apart from the occasional person who forgets to change clothes before undocking, you'd never have an opportunity to grief someone and blow up their monocle anyway.
AFAIK this will not apply to items like ship paintjobs, only to clothes and other bodily adornments.
That makes no sense, thats like saying no one would PVP in an expensive ship/mods because they run the risk of getting blown up.
THATS KINDA THE WHOLE POINT OF EVE.
Even though CCP have stated that making money isnt the point of this (as stated by a dev), the reason that they are willing to implement an item which does not follow the laws of Eve at all for the sake of money?
Didnt this bother you guys at all? Surely the CSM could see how this makes no sense, given that anything else in the game can be destroyed, and you actually are ok with people having items that can magically transport from one station to another?
______ GIGAR; >> The three priorities for CCP after launching Incarna will be
1)launching DUST 514, 2)launching World of Darkness 3)and continuing to improve on EVE. |
Hiram Alexander
Caldari The Night Crew
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 11:38:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
Originally by: AnzacPaul does csm know how vanity items survive being podkilled? Cause ccp wont answer my thread :(
They do this because if worn clothing was destructible, nobody would ever undock wearing any NEX-store goods.
Not at the current prices, you're right... However, at the current prices I'd imagine that almost no-one's going to buy them anyway...
Honestly, I've said it before, I think the whole pricing structure is absolutely pathetic. Indestructible clothes have no place in (my) EVE.
If the prices were cut right down, so that the transactions were actually "micro", I'd have no problem at all risking Nex goodies in pvp; hell it'd only add to the thrill.
|
Mel Civire
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 11:45:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
Originally by: Mel Civire Why does some rich **** get special treatment for a novelty trinket over my implants?
I (personally) would argue that the difference is that your implants have in-game effects.
The whole point of the NEX store is to generate income. Non-destructible clothes are almost certainly revenue-optimal. And clearly, non-destructible items cannot be allowed to have in-game effects without breaking the sandbox.
Put all these things together and non-destructibility is the best route for sandbox purists, because it draws a line in the sand, so to speak.
Doesn't this just contradict what you said about ship paint jobs?
If someone wants to buy a Barbie dress ups from the Space Shopping Network then more power to them. They can look at themselves in their mirror all day long.
However, what if I want to target people wearing Barbie Air Hostess costumes? People either have it with them or not. I can't agree that these things should be magical. After all, I'll be able to target custom painted ships.
Running with your logic might not destroy the sandbox, but it certainly lets the local cats **** in it.
|
Yarrrrrhh
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 11:48:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow The whole point of the NEX store is to generate income. Non-destructible clothes are almost certainly revenue-optimal.
What a load of bull****. If you want to generate income you create DESTRUCTIBLE ITEMS SO THEY CAN BE BLOWN UP SO PEOPLE HAVE TO BUY NEW ONES.
You really have no clue about this. It's obvious and you're not doing yourself a favor by pretending you do.
JESUS, they are even talking about built in obsolescence in the fearless newsletter as one of the best things to do. That's the antithesis of indestructible items.
Go away.
|
Mel Civire
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 11:52:00 -
[17]
And this is how the CSM works.
SOE (CCP) party line all the way.
|
Lady Spank
Amarr Trillionaire High-Rollers Suicidal Bassoon Orkesta
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 11:53:00 -
[18]
If cost is a factor, maybe they should make implants and officer mods indestructible too. Oh wait, that's a dumb idea, just like arbitrarily setting these items indestructible. ~~~
|
Shepard Book
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 11:55:00 -
[19]
Some people are always going to want to find something to complain aboutà Thank you for the announcement. I am looking forward to those May notes.
|
Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 11:56:00 -
[20]
Hybrids/Gallente, ja?
|
|
Cyaxares II
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 12:02:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
Originally by: Mel Civire Why does some rich **** get special treatment for a novelty trinket over my implants?
I (personally) would argue that the difference is that your implants have in-game effects.
The whole point of the NEX store is to generate income. Non-destructible clothes are almost certainly revenue-optimal. And clearly, non-destructible items cannot be allowed to have in-game effects without breaking the sandbox.
Put all these things together and non-destructibility is the best route for sandbox purists, because it draws a line in the sand, so to speak.
the last sentence sounds nice but doesn't make any sense.
I see how non-destructible clothes are better from a revenue perspective but nothing you said did explain how they are better than fully destructible clothes from the "sandbox purist"'s POV.
Unless you want to argue "if CCP does not earn enough with vanity items they will start selling convenience and advantages"...
|
Yarrrrrhh
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 12:03:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Shepard Book Some people are always going to want to find something to complain aboutà
Yeah, like we just found out that the person who should be discussing the players stance on the economic impacts the latest expansion has on the sandbox does not understand the most basic economic premises and instead repeats CCP's catastrophic and wrong stance.
That's the something we just found. We found out that we're ****ed. Nothing more, nothing less.
|
Yarrrrrhh
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 12:06:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow Non-destructible clothes are almost certainly revenue-optimal.
I'll make it even easier for everyone to see that Trebor is not competent to discuss this by asking the following question:
What is revenue-optimal?
There. See what I just did? I just called him out on using a completely meaningless term.
|
Cashcow Golden Goose
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 12:08:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
Originally by: Mel Civire Why does some rich **** get special treatment for a novelty trinket over my implants?
I (personally) would argue that the difference is that your implants have in-game effects.
The whole point of the NEX store is to generate income. Non-destructible clothes are almost certainly revenue-optimal. And clearly, non-destructible items cannot be allowed to have in-game effects without breaking the sandbox.
Put all these things together and non-destructibility is the best route for sandbox purists, because it draws a line in the sand, so to speak.
CSM towing the company line. This is why you're irrelevant.
|
Kerrisone
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 12:14:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
Originally by: AnzacPaul does csm know how vanity items survive being podkilled? Cause ccp wont answer my thread :(
They do this because if worn clothing was destructible, nobody would ever undock wearing any NEX-store goods.
And because nullsec folks tend to be in danger of being podded, this means they would not buy fancy monocles, because they would always be putting them on and taking them off -- too much of a pain.
And if CCP decided to address this by making it easy to change clothes (so you had party clothes and work clothes), then apart from the occasional person who forgets to change clothes before undocking, you'd never have an opportunity to grief someone and blow up their monocle anyway.
AFAIK this will not apply to items like ship paintjobs, only to clothes and other bodily adornments.
Only for some, well off people wouldn't care, at current stupid nex prices. At reasonable prices more people would undock with clothes accepting it as a risk just as they do with anything they undock with.
Vanity items do have in game effects as well as out of game effects, creating a 'elite' class and relegating those not participating in the dress up to status of 'poor' pod pilots. In a game where you're value could be any number of things Incarna will start out with class divisions to obviously make many look like poor slobs, certainly seems like a great way to make EVE 'real' and increase immersion. Some will care and some won't, in some cases the 'elite' will the butt of many jokes and harassment but in others it will be the reverse this obviously is excellent gameplay to add in EVE and most assuredly extremely important to walking in stations.
As far as griefing people it would be more about the grief than the monocle out in space, sort of like blacklisting, cause that is just about the only 'value' NEX pricing/items 'adds' to the game. Chase down the monocle wearers, kill them where you find them, deny them access to your corp, make them pariahs. With their precious nex items safe from being destroyed griefing them nets CCP no extra money from destroyed crap that needs to be replaced.
Originally by: Ghoest Ill watch what you do not what you say.
|
Trebor Daehdoow
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 12:23:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Yarrrrrhh What a load of bull****. If you want to generate income you create DESTRUCTIBLE ITEMS SO THEY CAN BE BLOWN UP SO PEOPLE HAVE TO BUY NEW ONES.
With respect, I must disagree.
1) Non-destructible items can be sold at higher prices than destructible ones (although we can all agree that the prices CCP settled upon were in most cases wrong).
2) There are broadly speaking two populations in EVE -- Carebears who rarely get podded, and thus rarely would have to rebuy their destructible clothes, and PvPers who are always getting podded, and thus (given the annoyance-factor of having to undress/redress) would rarely buy them in the first place. Nobody who is getting podded every week is going to buy a monocle.
Thus, by making clothing non-destructible, you increase your income from both groups.
Originally by: Cyaxares II Unless you want to argue "if CCP does not earn enough with vanity items they will start selling convenience and advantages"...
I would prefer there to be a strong precedent in place, to reduce future temptation.
Originally by: Yarrrrrhh What is revenue-optimal? There. See what I just did? I just called him out on using a completely meaningless term.
It is the set of conditions and prices that generates the greatest income. I have some small experience with pricing of goods with little or no marginal cost-of-goods-sold; you may be interested in a brief paper I wrote on the subject over a decade ago; not entirely on point, but there are analogies.
|
MaiLina KaTar
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 12:26:00 -
[27]
Edited by: MaiLina KaTar on 12/07/2011 12:26:56
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow Put all these things together and non-destructibility is the best route for sandbox purists, because it draws a line in the sand, so to speak.
The actual reason why these items will remain invincible is really rather simple: If they were destructible, people would simply undress them before undocking. The consequence would be a lot of stress on the item database and a lot of whining from people who frown at swapping their vanaity **** around all the time to avoid losses.
Making them destructible wouldn't accomplish anything, really. Nobody would gain, devtime would be invested for no tangible effect on gameplay. CPU would be wasted with just as little effect. It would be nothing but a cash sink.
|
Shepard Book
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 12:28:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Yarrrrrhh
Originally by: Shepard Book Some people are always going to want to find something to complain aboutà
Yeah, like we just found out that the person who should be discussing the players stance on the economic impacts the latest expansion has on the sandbox does not understand the most basic economic premises and instead repeats CCP's catastrophic and wrong stance.
That's the something we just found. We found out that we're ****ed. Nothing more, nothing less.
Everyone has opinions. All you do is try to berate people in most posts you make no matter what the subject. So yeah, I do not listen to a word you say. I believe most people can see through the poison you are trying to spread.
|
Yarrrrrhh
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 12:32:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Yarrrrrhh on 12/07/2011 12:36:44
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
1) Non-destructible items can be sold at higher prices than destructible ones (although we can all agree that the prices CCP settled upon were in most cases wrong).
We're talking about revenue here. Revenue is the product of price times number of sales. Ignoring the second part of the equation does not really improve my view of your economic capabilities.
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
2) There are broadly speaking two populations in EVE -- Carebears who rarely get podded, and thus rarely would have to rebuy their destructible clothes, and PvPers who are always getting podded, and thus (given the annoyance-factor of having to undress/redress) would rarely buy them in the first place. Nobody who is getting podded every week is going to buy a monocle.
Using this approach anything can be justified. Broadly speaking this is even more bull****, no facts, no statistics, nothing. I'd even argue that there are more than two populations. Broadly speaking, that is.
Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow
It is the set of conditions and prices that generates the greatest income. I have some small experience with pricing of goods with little or no marginal cost-of-goods-sold; you may be interested in a brief paper I wrote on the subject over a decade ago; not entirely on point, but there are analogies.
Scanned over it. It's about tipping and intellectual property. Barely any numbers inclded, no graphs, no formulae, no link to raw data. No references to other scientific papers. And it's two pages long.
You wrote that in school and it does not apply to the topic at hand. You have no clue about this.
The fact that you're even linking to that so called 'paper' to prove your point tells me you're delusional about the amount of your scientific expertise. Thus I repeat my initial point. We're ****ed.
|
Yarrrrrhh
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 12:48:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Shepard Book
Everyone has opinions. All you do is try to berate people in most posts you make no matter what the subject. So yeah, I do not listen to a word you say. I believe most people can see through the poison you are trying to spread.
See that's the problem. You think these are opinions and you 'believe' stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |