Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Shar Tegral
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 02:28:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Shar Tegral Fare you well, may you troll another and I hope gtc prices aren't too high when you reactivate your datacore farming expired accounts.
Originally by: Tonto Auri I don't have datacore farming expired accounts. So you have stated something that are obvious lie.
You should go back to your school teachers and complain. You obvious do not understand the difference between speculation and deceit. And I'll admit that what I suggested was an unfounded speculation but one has to wonder if you do not benefit from the system as is why are you for strongly for it? The clearest bit of logic (to what gain?) proves that you may not be quite honest in your intentions. To be fair, you might not have expired accounts (right now) but that you might just be trolling. Perhaps you invested in Matalino's Datacore Farming Warehouse IPO. The one thing that is missing is a clear idea of why you think it is wrong. So, instead of trying snide personal attacks about what you think I want Eve to be why don't you tell me what is wrong with taking a critical look at passive resource gain? I realize that sp gain, passively, is an inherent facet of Eve. A pure fundamental that differentiates it from the rest of the MMO market. However CCP already has no SP gain on expired accounts active on Eve China. So there is data available about the effects this can have, pro and con, for CCP and the Playerbase. As to rp gain; I think passive gain and expired account passive gain should be reviewed with a critical eye. It is, plainly, free isk. One can, and has, argue that it is a return on investment of skill training and standing gains. Passive gain should be a clearly unplatable choice in comparison to Active gain of research points. The doubling of return is clearly not it since it is far easier, and less effort, to skill up & standings grind alts on a second account. Then you simply let the account expire and start again with another account. Keep up the rotation and you have alt economy of scale. This is not working smarter or working harder. It's just taking undue advantage of the game by people that don't pay to play. Any advantage like that is a clear disadvantage to those who do pay to play. I await your response and hope that you can refrain from the ad hominem or the straw man argument styles.
To Shar -verb: 1 - To say what you mean. 2 - To say what it means. 3 - To say something mean. |
Big Al
The Aftermath
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 03:31:00 -
[32]
And how is that China server doing? Oh? 3000 at peak you say. Let's use it as an example of why this is a good idea.
I think CCP would try this again (they have already tested the waters with the 'accidental' note in the patches that was 'intended for the china server' (even though they have said the entities are completely separate). Last time drew massive amounts of ire from the playerbase, but greed is good.
Personally I don't care, my accounts are active most of the time anyway. However, I cannot support this issue as I do like letting them lapse occasionally.
|
MirrorGod
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 04:05:00 -
[33]
Half supported.
Yes on the RP, because that's messing with teh T2 market.
No on the SP, because it's just silly to deny such an awesome game feature
Recruitment: [ANTI]
|
Draygo Korvan
Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 05:57:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Draygo Korvan on 09/06/2008 05:57:03 I really think this thread needs to be split into 2 seperate issues:
SP gain while account inactive: No support for stopping skill training while an account is inactive. Doing so means that my account will stop training even if I renew 1 minute later. And I think its important for people to be able to do other things without getting significantly behind on their training.
and RP gain while account inactive: Definatly support, if you can gain RP while your account is lapsed you can leave it lapsed until you want to cash out. You are essentially getting an award for doing absolutely nothing. Where Skill training will eventually expire, RP gain does not. --
|
aUTOKILL
Invicta.
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 05:59:00 -
[35]
ummm if i go afk for like a week and my gtc runs out i dont want to lose sp. ok. thx. ~~~~~~ doin it for the stats
|
Tiger Delivery
THE INTERNET.
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 08:05:00 -
[36]
If you were smart, you would of spearated the two issues.
|
Shar Tegral
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 09:31:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Tiger Delivery If you were smart, you would of spearated the two issues.
I stated early into the thread that while it maybe different points being added on the issue is essentially the same. Accumulation of passive resources upon expired accounts. While my history demonstrates my level of "smart" it also shows that I do things honestly. To split the issue, by me, would be dishonest in my book. /me shrugs Originally by: aUTOKILL ummm if i go afk for like a week and my gtc runs out i dont want to lose sp. ok. thx.
So you're reason for this to continue is it is a safety measure to protect you from your own "fail"? Originally by: MirrorGod No on the SP, because it's just silly to deny such an awesome game feature
I agree, it is an awesome game feature. But like I said, bringing one kind of expired resource gain into review should also bring the other as well. Concluding my involvement here: Half support is fine too. CSM members are not idiots and will see the value of this idea upon it's own merits. They will also see what is "popular" of this issue and what is not. So the point of splitting it up is really moot. Just speak your pro's and con's and support or not support and everything will be good in the end. (Just please stop with the personal attacks as it only makes the attacker look rather... whats the english word for trailer park? Plebbie? Chav?)
To Shar -verb: 1 - To say what you mean. 2 - To say what it means. 3 - To say something mean. |
BiggestT
Fun Inc Black-Out
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 11:23:00 -
[38]
NOO WAY! THUMBS DOWN! too many times have i been awaiting withdraw of funds from paypal and my accounts expired. Just because i dont pay fro sub-scription with isk as i dont play enough doesnt mean i should be at a dis-advantage ..|.. <-OP
Boost Field commands! they need love :( |
McRuder
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 11:43:00 -
[39]
No.
|
Shaitis
Reikoku Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 13:51:00 -
[40]
I disagree
"What is funnier ? 20 Matari slaves pinned to one tree or 1 Matari slave pinned to 20 trees ? |
|
Vanessa Vale
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 16:30:00 -
[41]
No. The less incentives players have to come back, the less they will.
Minmatar Boost Brigade |
Scagga Laebetrovo
Delictum 23216 San Matari.
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 16:35:00 -
[42]
Supported.
San Matari Official forums |
Aloriana Jacques
Royal Amarr Institute
|
Posted - 2008.06.29 01:37:00 -
[43]
Originally by: MirrorGod Half supported.
Yes on the RP, because that's messing with teh T2 market.
No on the SP, because it's just silly to deny such an awesome game feature.
|
Artemis Rose
Eleckrostatik
|
Posted - 2008.06.29 09:43:00 -
[44]
Just like you said at the end of you original post Shar, thinking about the datacore pile you have waiting, and the seemingly impossibly long 60 day skill finished up is a damn good reason to start playing Eve again if you were previously inactive. |
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.06.29 10:26:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Lee Scoresby
I guess I sort of agree about research points, but I don't think there's a problem with allowing one skill to finish when an account is inactive. Overall, I don't think it's worth bringing up.
This I will support, but getting a long skill trained while the account was inactive is a great way to lure back players. The change of GTC to 60 days and a little higher cost was probably partially motivated by the people training 1 month in 1 month out but much more buy the RP farming operations.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.06.29 10:30:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Shar Tegral
Originally by: Letouk Mernel If you want to "compete" with expired accounts in the Research Points field, you can simply do the research agent's daily mission, and voila you get 2x the number of points compared to the other guy.
Well this is something of a digression into another area I think long overdue for overhaul as well. The fact that by doing nothing someone can make half as much as I do, in fact they can be coasting on an expired account as well, makes actively missioning your R&D agent a fools errand. Mind you, I'm not impoverished by these matters. Not everything aired is because there is a direct gain for the person championing the cause. I'm well known, for many years, not for my whining but for my thinking & speaking. This is a small thing that could use some critical (& objective) review and debate.
You "gain" a storyline every 16 R&D missions too. For me it was way more useful than the RP point gains. |
Little Fistter
|
Posted - 2008.06.29 15:16:00 -
[47]
I DISAGREE!
For a player to continue to gain SP and RP is a great hook. It distinguished Eve from all the other games.
My account has never stopped and I have never benefitted from this, but if I had to go away for a year (say national service or lack of funds after a baby born, etc) these things make Eve a game I am more likely to return to.
Look. It costs nothing. It is not really an exploit. In the long run it makes CCP more money and therefore keeps this game going.
Let the expired accounts continue to earn something so they come back.
NO. Suggestion: Please color jump gates the same color as the system security rating of the destination system in the overview.
LITTLE FISTTER
Broken Sigs?
|
Bad Harlequin
Minmatar The Harlequinade
|
Posted - 2008.06.29 15:30:00 -
[48]
Edited by: Bad Harlequin on 29/06/2008 15:36:06
Originally by: Rooker No.
Part of what makes Eve better than other MMOs is that you can take breaks without messing up your training.
Or, like me, go without internet involuntarily for three freakin months (thank you Embarq for having a single-digit IQ) without losing much in the way of training time.
People have real life issues that are more important than a video game. CCP recognizes this and that is part of why I like this game so much.
a thousand times this. was going to reply, fortunately read ahead before opening my big mouth for once . Rooker says it perfectly.
Originally by: Shar Tegral if you do not benefit from the system as is why are you for strongly for it?
please tell me you're kidding? think about this statement really hard for a while. |
Inanna Zuni
|
Posted - 2008.06.29 16:40:00 -
[49]
My personal view has always been that if you aren't an active player (in this case defined as a *paying* player) then you shouldn't expect to gain the benefits of being a paying player - ie SP and RP.
I - unofficially - raised this at the recent CCP-CSM meeting in passing on another subject and it was indicated to me from the CCP side that they saw this as beneficial to enticing people back into EVE if they feel they need to take a break from regular play.
I'm still uncertain about it, though setting a long skill to level 5 and disappearing off for that period without paying is (to me, anyway) clearly gaming the system. Commercially though it might well be better for CCP in the longer run to permit this.
IZ
My principles |
Jinx Barker
GFB Scientific
|
Posted - 2008.06.29 18:40:00 -
[50]
Sorry, nope, not in a million years. I have this thing called REAL LIFE, and the fact that EVE does not have to become a second job for me is one of the primary reasons I play.
The SP gain while account is inactive is relatively minor benefit - since the skill training STOPS once the skill is finished. The RP gain while account is inactive is also a relatively minor thing, since those accounts are reactivated to collect the RP and the benefit of ISK/Cash is small.
Sorry not supported EVER. |
|
Shar Tegral
|
Posted - 2008.06.29 19:11:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Jinx Barker Again, EVE is not a second job for most of us - and those two things you mention are actually of an extreme benefit for majority of the players.
Your defense of your real life simply comes across quite Shakespearean; "You doth protest too much." Somehow you are connecting your real life demands in connection with "inactive players" and blurring the lines to "active customers". It's a false argument that you've given in entirety and one can only assume that you either have misread the idea or your evepeen is heavily invested in using inactive accounts so that you don't have to play eve like the rest of us who do not. You know, those of us who play the game fairly without exploiting the system?? <sobs> "Waaaaaah, I wanna pvp all the time. Damn people who try to change my eve from 'counterstrike' online!!!!" </sobs> Cry us a bloody river and go back to posting how you drink carebear tears. Must make your whine go down better. NVM, discussing this with someone so obviously lame is not worth any of my time. In game or 'real life'.
|
Shar Tegral
|
Posted - 2008.06.29 19:32:00 -
[52]
This has been discussed long enough so I'm just going to close with this: Being an american I've seen what becomes when you set up a welfare state.
Inactive account skillpoint gain is not that and I probably should have brought it up in a different thread entirely.
Inactive account research point gain is the foundation of a welfare state. It is an automatic stipend that destroys an causality between reward and risk/effort.
However if the so called majority is in favor who am I to fight that... I'm just going to do all I can to poison the well entirely. I'll just go on and detail the exact steps to game the system so that there can be hundreds of accounts per each player gaining research points. Where will your real life be then? When everyone is doing it?
Short-sighted self-entitled fools. No wonder you need to exploit. Ta-ta now, gotta go use my non-exploiting success to go open a dozen accounts. |
Jinx Barker
GFB Scientific
|
Posted - 2008.06.29 19:41:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Shar Tegral ...flame & trolling in one's own thread...
Ok, lets see:
The quote is: "The lady doth protest too much, methinks." from Hamlet. However, you, as majority of unwashed masses, misinterpret what "protest" means. You view it as "denial" or "disagreement" when it really means, at least in Shakespeare, to "argue for," to "vow" and to "solemnly declare."
In other words, "protest" is not a juxtaposing view of the subject under discussion, but quite the opposite, the desire to "argue for the subject," so elaborate, so "artful," so full guile, that it undermines the credibility of the one who argues.
Which, to further infer, using the quote, means that you are the one who "doth protest too much, methinks" for your chosen subject, to the point of loosing all credibility in the process.
You are using every tool in the forum troll's arsenal to quash down any opposing view, and argue so vehemently for your proposal, with flame and trolling, to the point that, indeed, you loose all credibility in the matter. It is hard to see what you are arguing for, other than maximizing your personal gain, you attribute "intent" to me for example, of being a "CS crybaby," while I I am not a fan of the game, which you would not know, of course.
Or, you take the position of mysterious "Us," thus assuming that while you have 5 supports in this thread and many more denials of your idea, trying to add weight to an argument which is lost.
Oh, and just to clarify things, I have two accounts: one is for JB as pure combat, and the other one is a 100% carebear T2 manufacturer and inventor. As such, again, you assumed that I was relying on "inactive/active" game to make ISK in game, again falsley.
If you took the time not to run headlong into a brick wall, and flame and troll in your own thread, you would have realized that I am arguing against your idea because it is detrimental to the majority of the players who have come to rely on that extra time when the account goes inactive to train that particular skill, or the meagre RP collected while they are inactive, as opposed to being tied to EVE 23/7.
That is why the developers of EVE, as stated by the CSM representative, are reluctant to change the system, the benefit of retaining the players is far outweighing the small and perceived inconvenience of those who would "protest too much" for their idea while representing it as the "common goal."
Best of luck to you in your next fallacy. |
Jinx Barker
GFB Scientific
|
Posted - 2008.06.29 19:51:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Shar Tegral
This has been discussed long enough so I'm just going to close with this: Being an american I've seen what becomes when you set up a welfare state.
Inactive account skillpoint gain is not that and I probably should have brought it up in a different thread entirely.
Inactive account research point gain is the foundation of a welfare state. It is an automatic stipend that destroys an causality between reward and risk/effort.
However if the so called majority is in favor who am I to fight that... I'm just going to do all I can to poison the well entirely. I'll just go on and detail the exact steps to game the system so that there can be hundreds of accounts per each player gaining research points. Where will your real life be then? When everyone is doing it?
Short-sighted self-entitled fools. No wonder you need to exploit. Ta-ta now, gotta go use my non-exploiting success to go open a dozen accounts.
I have highlighted some trolling and flaming.
1) I am an American, and I disagree with you 100%. Please do not use national distinctions to argue for things in a "make belief" universe of EVE. It really means that you are taking the game too seriously and need a break.
2) If you refrained from trolling your own threads and creating a flame-bait posts, you probably would have had greater success in the matter.
3) Although I might agree with you in "principle" that gaining RP while inactive is not the best idea, and as a T2 manufacturer would probably support it in the long run, the benefit of retaining a greater EVE population, in my opinion, far outweighs the detriment of the so called "stipend."
|
Rooker
Lysian Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.06.29 20:16:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Inanna Zuni I'm still uncertain about it, though setting a long skill to level 5 and disappearing off for that period without paying is (to me, anyway) clearly gaming the system.
It is no more "gaming the system" than having that same level 5 skill training when you go to sleep. They designed it this way intentionally and for a reason.
When I was without internet for 3 months (THX EMBARQ MORONS), I almost didn't come back. But then I realized a long and very nice lvl5 skill had finished, so I patched the client, logged back in and prompty bought a time code (that somebody else bought from CCP).
-- Let Us Avoid Systems Via Autopilot |
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.06.29 22:13:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Shar Tegral
Originally by: Jinx Barker Again, EVE is not a second job for most of us - and those two things you mention are actually of an extreme benefit for majority of the players.
Your defense of your real life simply comes across quite Shakespearean; "You doth protest too much." Somehow you are connecting your real life demands in connection with "inactive players" and blurring the lines to "active customers". It's a false argument that you've given in entirety and one can only assume that you either have misread the idea or your evepeen is heavily invested in using inactive accounts so that you don't have to play eve like the rest of us who do not. You know, those of us who play the game fairly without exploiting the system?? <sobs> "Waaaaaah, I wanna pvp all the time. Damn people who try to change my eve from 'counterstrike' online!!!!" </sobs> Cry us a bloody river and go back to posting how you drink carebear tears. Must make your whine go down better. NVM, discussing this with someone so obviously lame is not worth any of my time. In game or 'real life'.
For someone that some post ago asked not to use ad hominem attacks you have a very fondness for them.
Try to follow your advice and speak only about the objections, not about your opinion of the perso who object and his reasons.
|
Boknamar
Gallente The Knights Trevor
|
Posted - 2008.06.30 04:28:00 -
[57]
Edited by: Boknamar on 30/06/2008 04:29:32
Originally by: Inanna Zuni My personal view has always been that if you aren't an active player (in this case defined as a *paying* player) then you shouldn't expect to gain the benefits of being a paying player - ie SP and RP.
I - unofficially - raised this at the recent CCP-CSM meeting in passing on another subject and it was indicated to me from the CCP side that they saw this as beneficial to enticing people back into EVE if they feel they need to take a break from regular play.
I'm still uncertain about it, though setting a long skill to level 5 and disappearing off for that period without paying is (to me, anyway) clearly gaming the system. Commercially though it might well be better for CCP in the longer run to permit this.
IZ
I don't understand your "gaming the system" logic. There are very few individual skill trainings that take much more than a month. The vast majority of them take much less. So in order to get the same training as an active player, the inactive player must resubcribe periodically to switch out skills, paying practically as much as the active player. Only the inactive player gets much less from the game overall. They get no ISK, few or no material assets, and no standing increases. I don't really see anything wrong with that situation. |
Vuxacha
VTECHS
|
Posted - 2008.06.30 07:21:00 -
[58]
I'm against this. The thing which has kept me (and my multiple accounts) as a subscriber has been the ability to trail behind everyone else during the rough months.
Sure you can train up battleship V etc, but so what? I can understand the RP thing, but SP affects only me. Even those who (full disclosure: I've tried to do this) try and cheat the system via alt training have to go through a lot of pain to do it. Getting all the timing right and stuff, just not worth it.
Players trying to get ahead using this method are paying for more resources while using less. It reminds me of the ISP model. Under that model, you'd be the p2p user (I assume that because you're a trader, you constantly refresh market, make changes to the DB, query the DB etc to stay ahead?) while those guys are the "sure I'll pay for broadband then use it only for email and IM". Eve gets to keep some players around which it otherwise wouldnt and CCP has more income for infrastructure.
Using this method I've trained covert ops V, battleships V, and maybe some learning skills to V. Doesn't mean I can just come back and buy a battleship or covert op. Doesn't mean I have any experience or skill with the ship. If your proposal came to pass, guys like me would be sitting at 4mil if we even hung around. Depressed that yesterday's dread is today's cruiser. As long as resources do not accumulate, the player has very few advantages. So he saved a few IRL dollars..who cares? Isn't that what Power^2 is anyway?
I suggest the following alteration:
Disable RP accumulation Disable ALL market orders
|
Jinx Barker
GFB Scientific
|
Posted - 2008.06.30 07:57:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Vuxacha Disable ALL market orders
I was going on and reading, and nodding, and agreeing with the post made by Vuxacha, and then the quoted text came into view... at the moment I am having an interesting sensation in my left arm, I think its a heart attack.....
|
General StarScream
Gallente Empyrean Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.06.30 08:01:00 -
[60]
you know for each of those characters you want to farm data cores with you need 100m in skill and a lvl5 standing to the Corp you want the cores from, offen 2 corps. if you want good data cores on all agents.
and this is alot of work, to setup, to make good money from it. so if someone whants to do this, then good on em, anyone can do it, so since you cant afford or have the time or what ever to do it, dont mean it should be nerfed., Please resize signature to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |