Originally by: Awesome Possum

---

I am not supporting this, because I plan on skilling up all 3 slots on all 3 of my accounts to do exactly this, I then plan on purchasing 4 more accounts to skill all 3 slots up for this as well, I will then allow the 4 accounts to go inactive for 6 months at a time.

I absolutely, vehemently demand that CCP ignore this proposal and any other affecting ghost datacore mining.

---

Originally by: De'Veldrin

---

Originally by: Awesome Possum

---

I am not supporting this, because I plan on skilling up all 3 slots on all 3 of my accounts to do exactly this, I then plan on purchasing 4 more accounts to skill all 3 slots up for this as well, I will then allow the 4 accounts to go inactive for 6 months at a time.

I absolutely, vehemently demand that CCP ignore this proposal and any other affecting ghost datacore mining.

---

I see what you did there. Not your best effort, tbh.

---

Originally by: Awesome Possum

---

I am not supporting this, because I plan on skilling up all 3 slots on all 3 of my accounts to do exactly this, I then plan on purchasing 4 more accounts to skill all 3 slots up for this as well, I will then allow the 4 accounts to go inactive for 6 months at a time.

I absolutely, vehemently demand that CCP ignore this proposal and any other affecting ghost datacore mining.

---

Originally by: Crumplecorn

---

I prefer launching bathtubs of antimatter at my opponents over pointing an open DVD player at them, even if the bathtubs do miss a lot. So no.

---

Originally by: Darax Thulain

---

You guys need to think this through before voting for this. At the moment it is not easy to know how many actually choose to recativate accounts for this purpose, but I am one of them.

Still, you may say that it deflates value of datacores. This is true, but you are forgetting the fact that the price of t2 stuff is still going up atm and the datacores costs alot(they can take some more deflation imho). And if this is implemented they will reach an all time high.

Give it some thought.

---

Originally by: Darax Thulain

---

Edited by: Darax Thulain on 26/12/2009 15:50:34
Not saying you should. Im just saying what the results of such a change would be.

edit; leave space for people to find text!

---

Originally by: Drake Draconis

---

If your not paying for the account... you have no business exploiting an game mechanic.

Market prices are frakked as it is because of the exploitation and anything else you can think of that people shouldn't be doing. It isn't an excuse to allow it to continue.

For you to even dare defend such a thing proves this is a larger problem than you claim it not to be.

---

Originally by: Darax Thulain

---

Its important to note that I have at least 15 agents per account, and the only way I am getting a profit out of this atm since I am using gtc to fund accts, is to let them go inactive and claim at a later date.

-Darax

---

Originally by: Hamano Walker

---

Originally by: Darax Thulain

---

Its important to note that I have at least 15 agents per account, and the only way I am getting a profit out of this atm since I am using gtc to fund accts, is to let them go inactive and claim at a later date.

-Darax

---

Don't take this as a personal attack, but I think that perfectly proves the point that there is a problem.

---

Originally by: Venkul Mul

---

If the goal is higher cost T2, go for it.

---

Originally by: Venkul Mul

---

If the goal is higher cost T2, go for it.

---

Originally by: Burnharder

---

I don't support this, as I didn't support removal of ghost training either. For people like me, who subscribe for a while and then go do something else (like go outside), the thought that 6 months down the line I've trained a new skill to level 5, or earned some cash from datacore accumulation is motivating to subscribe again.

---

Originally by: Malcanis

---

Originally by: Venkul Mul

---

If the goal is higher cost T2, go for it.

---

The same argument could have been made by the POS exploiters...

You're assuming that the price of moon minerals wouldn't fall slightly to compensate.

---

Originally by: Bagehi

---

Since the inception of the game, the longer you remain in the game, the more metagaming tricks you learn. The metagaming tricks are, more than anything else, why older players have fat passive income, while newer players struggle.

It is also why (I think) newer players get frustrated by the game. If players make it long enough in the game to get into corps/alliances, they eventually ask "how do you make so much money?" The answer is usually met with stunned silence or complaints about how it breaks the game.

Whether it is 20 mining alts sucking on Veld AFK, or POS tricks that magically create moon mins, or inactive training characters to sell, or inactive research, and anything else... they really do not help the market as a whole as only a small portion of people are actually involved in these activities.

When income disparity comes from manipulating the game, not playing it, the game is broken.

---

Originally by: De'Veldrin

---

IOW, you want to get stuff with no effort on your part. I mean that's fine, but let's call it what it is. "I don't want you to nerf my free stuff!"

---

Originally by: Awesome Possum

---

Originally by: De'Veldrin

---

Originally by: Awesome Possum

---

I am not supporting this, because I plan on skilling up all 3 slots on all 3 of my accounts to do exactly this, I then plan on purchasing 4 more accounts to skill all 3 slots up for this as well, I will then allow the 4 accounts to go inactive for 6 months at a time.

I absolutely, vehemently demand that CCP ignore this proposal and any other affecting ghost datacore mining.

---

I see what you did there. Not your best effort, tbh.

---

Best way to get them to fix something is to tell them not to.

---

Originally by: Vod****

---

Edited by: Vod**** on 22/12/2009 09:24:09
Problem summary: Inactive (unpaid) accounts continue to accumulate agent rewards, i.e. datacores. This had a similar issue (ghost training) which was resolved a few years back.

---

Originally by: Dungheap

---

Originally by: Vod****

---

Edited by: Vod**** on 22/12/2009 09:24:09
Problem summary: Inactive (unpaid) accounts continue to accumulate agent rewards, i.e. datacores. This had a similar issue (ghost training) which was resolved a few years back.

---

what of blueprint research, capital construction jobs, market orders, and contracts. do these not continue and earn income for an inactive account, and directly compete with players who are still active?

can't support something which seems only to the benfit of some players, like yourself, who seek to eliminate their competition in the name of fairness.

---

Originally by: Dungheap

---

Originally by: Vod****

---

Edited by: Vod**** on 22/12/2009 09:24:09
Problem summary: Inactive (unpaid) accounts continue to accumulate agent rewards, i.e. datacores. This had a similar issue (ghost training) which was resolved a few years back.

---

what of blueprint research, capital construction jobs, market orders, and contracts. do these not continue and earn income for an inactive account, and directly compete with players who are still active?

can't support something which seems only to the benfit of some players, like yourself, who seek to eliminate their competition in the name of fairness.

---

Quote:

---

we can't take breaks from paying our bills... neither should you.

---

Originally by: Charlotte Smith

---

I have a moral problem with this text:

Quote:

---

we can't take breaks from paying our bills... neither should you.

---

That implies that when YOU cannot pay bills and therefor cannot play EVE, OTHER players should not be able to play EVE either.

While I agree with disabling Ghost Training, and I'ld agree with disabling Ghost Datacores, I will vote against the OP if that quote up here is the main issue.

---

Originally by: De'Veldrin

---

Originally by: Dungheap

---

Originally by: Vod****

---

Edited by: Vod**** on 22/12/2009 09:24:09
Problem summary: Inactive (unpaid) accounts continue to accumulate agent rewards, i.e. datacores. This had a similar issue (ghost training) which was resolved a few years back.

---

what of blueprint research, capital construction jobs, market orders, and contracts. do these not continue and earn income for an inactive account, and directly compete with players who are still active?

can't support something which seems only to the benfit of some players, like yourself, who seek to eliminate their competition in the name of fairness.

---

I think you're missing the point. While the initial proposal was only for ghost datacore production, I, and several others here, have pushed the idea of stopping ALL activities from an inactive account.

For example when an account goes inactive:
1. All market orders are immediately expired. At the next downtime, the goods from those orders are returned to the character's hangar as normal with expired orders.
2. All blueprint research jobs are canceled. The blueprint is thus returned to the hangar it started in, and the slot will free up on its own, as per normal when a job is cancelled.


These are just some examples, but the idea that these activities MUST continue for some reason is ludicrous, especially when the game already has logic to cancel the activities in an orderly fashion.

---

Originally by: Charlotte Smith

---

I have a moral problem with this text:

Quote:

---

we can't take breaks from paying our bills... neither should you.

---

That implies that when YOU cannot pay bills and therefor cannot play EVE, OTHER players should not be able to play EVE either.

While I agree with disabling Ghost Training, and I'ld agree with disabling Ghost Datacores, I will vote against the OP if that quote up here is the main issue.

---

Quote:

---

I think you're misunderstanding Drake. He's not that big a jerk. (Luvs ya Drake!Razz) I think what he emans is that if you're not playing the game, and therefore not paying for it, you shouldn't get a benefit from it, the same as if you don't pay your electric bill, you don't get the benefit of having electricity.

---

Originally by: Charlotte Smith

---

Drake, that wasn't put out of context, just the way of wording got me annoyed.
The way De'Veldrin puts it, I understand.

But still some replies indicate that 'getting' 6 high-level R&D agents is 'easy'.

'You only need standings'
That means grinding missions for specific R&D Corporations.
Each top Level 4 R&D Agent requires a standing of 6.90.

The top 6 Level 4 R&D Agents are from:

Mastance Seillaerdt - Roden Shipyards - Gallente
Ya Alhunaya - Ishukone Corporation - Caldari
Aldilbet Sotisarin - Boundless Creation - Minmatar
Bummiri Nadaneh - Carthum Conglomerate - Amarr
Sitaleere Beene - Duvolle Laboratories - Gallente
Panakiya Nakkilen - Lai Dai Corporation - Caldari

Not to mention all those agents are far from each other, but alas, auto-pilot ftw. (If anyone dares with datacores in its cargohold)

'You only need some Science skills'
To absolutly maximize output You need:

Research 5
Science 5
Laboratory Operation level 5
Research Project Management level 5
Mechanical Engineering level 5
Molecular Engineering level 5
Nanite Engineering level 5
(Any other science skill you want Datacores from to level 5, adding another 20 days of training)

Depending on attributes and implants, that means 150 to 200 days of training.

Again I agree with the argument 'Inactive should disable everything'.

But I cannot get rid of the (feeling) underlaying accusation from newbie players toward players who DID train all those skills, benefiting from getting Research Points, whatever those accounts are active or inactive.

---

Originally by: Empire Dweller

---

Ill go one step further and say research points should be reset to zero...when an account is inactive.

---

Originally by: De'Veldrin

---

Edited by: De''Veldrin on 04/01/2010 18:32:23

Originally by: Empire Dweller

---

Ill go one step further and say research points should be reset to zero...when an account is inactive.

---

I think that's going too far. You did, after all, accumulate the RP's with an active account. That would be like saying if your acount goes inactive we zero out your ISK.

---

Originally by: Perrigrene

---

Not the issue being discussed, and the problem with this is if you forget to change payment methods or otherwise fund your account be it a day or several before you can pay CCP, everything you had going on gets 'canceled'. Make a mistake, get wrapped up in real life issues and congratulations we cancelled all your orders, research, manufacturing etc, welcome back. To me that is stupid, you pay for market orders, you pay for research/manufacturing jobs anything you pay for should continue until completion or the account is removed by CCP, not ludicrous at all to me.

Research Points are not something you pay for directly like any of the above, you train some skills build up standing and say let's work on something, then you are given RP throughout the day over and over till you cash them in or stop your research with the agent. While I disagree with the removal of Ghost training(on principle) it is done, getting something for nothing (direct pay) is what CCP said they don't offer (ninja edited but still) so removing the collection of RP on inactive accounts when you turn them back on is a logical step along with the Ghost Training nerf.

I support this idea because it works with the system of no gain for no pay on inactive accounts, which is what RP collection and skill progress on unpaid accounts are, market orders and research are paid for with isk and set to end by their nature.

---

Originally by: Dungheap

---

what of blueprint research, capital construction jobs, market orders, and contracts. do these not continue and earn income for an inactive account, and directly compete with players who are still active?

---

Originally by: Empire DwellerIll go one step further and say research points should be reset to zero and not advance when an account is inactive.[/quote

---

That is totally stupid.

Your LP reset to zero when you stop paying your account?

Your isk reset to 0?

What you have already earned is earned. Deleting it because some people are green with envy at other people wallet is absurd.

Originally by: Venkul Mul

---

Edited by: Venkul Mul on 05/01/2010 12:31:52

Originally by: Empire Dweller

---

Ill go one step further and say research points should be reset to zero and not advance when an account is inactive.

---

That is totally stupid.

Your LP reset to zero when you stop paying your account?

Your isk reset to 0?

What you have already earned is earned. Deleting it because some people are green with envy at other people wallet is absurd.

---

Originally by: De'Veldrin

---

Supported.

If a person's account goes inactive all activitity on that account should be pulled at the next downtime. All market orders, all agent rewards, all contracts, everything.

---

Originally by: AnonyTerrorNinja

---

Next people are going to demand that market buy/sell orders on inactive accounts automatically become 'paused' and invisible on the market...

I'm mixed on supporting or not supporting this, but honestly considering the significant amount of work involved in gaining access to the worth-while agents and the fact that, if it were done on such a massive scale, there would be an 'issue' in datacore supply/demand ratios (read: there isn't; there's such an excess of supply that 0.01isk order warfare is almost more common than that for tritanium/pyerite).


As it stands, while any given account is inactive farming the RP, the owner cannot cash in the RP to get the datacores. When he does, someone (or even a few people) may do the same at roughly the same time, and the two people will end up having reactivated a whole bunch of accounts they do nothing else with purely to flood an already saturated market with a commodity nobody needs to buy anymore (because they either already have supplies of datacores from exploration that they can't sell off or they are doing the exact same thing anyway).


On the flipside this would hurt the lower-key guys that are trying to farm RP for invention purposes rather than for direct-trade purposes; whether they intend to invent for personal/corp/alliance use or to sell the end product(s) to the market instead.

So actually no, I can't support this; hurts the fat-cats 'abusing' the system at the same time as the start-up players trying to find a viable means of making a bit of extra isk.

---

Originally by: Ava Stonlai

---

Originally by: AnonyTerrorNinja

---

*snip*

---

Uh, no, the fat-cats abusing the system are the ones hurting the people trying to make some extra isk, they are the ones who flood the 'stable' market of players cashing in and selling Datacores. The people who log in once a year to collect Datacores from x accounts hurt the people trying to make some isk from datacores but who actually play and supply them year round. They are the ones who trade them to a main and can sell off their stockpile year round but are likely more motivated to take less cause their main's running out of game time. Having only paid to activate the account and collect the Datacore their Research Point farmers go back to sleep until next time.

---

Originally by: AnonyTerrorNinja

---

Why should this kind of limitation be imposed on purely inactive accounts? Someone may have two characters on their "main's" account that do nothing but purely this; fair enough that account is paid for, but that's two essentially inactive characters if they are used for purely RP grinding.

Alternatively they could have this going on an account purely bred for AFK mining with RP generation on the side, or even just for an Orca alt.


Why should other forms of AFK play have it easy while this doesn't?

---

Originally by: Vorok

---

Originally by: AnonyTerrorNinja

---

Why should this kind of limitation be imposed on purely inactive accounts? Someone may have two characters on their "main's" account that do nothing but purely this; fair enough that account is paid for, but that's two essentially inactive characters if they are used for purely RP grinding.

Alternatively they could have this going on an account purely bred for AFK mining with RP generation on the side, or even just for an Orca alt.


Why should other forms of AFK play have it easy while this doesn't?

---

Because you can't afk mine on an inactive account. Pay for the account and you get three character slots to use for whatever you wish. If someone wants to pay for 3 accounts with all 9 character generating maximal datacores, they should be allowed to.

---

Originally by: AnonyTerrorNinja

---

Originally by: Ava Stonlai

---

Originally by: AnonyTerrorNinja

---

*snip*

---

Uh, no, the fat-cats abusing the system are the ones hurting the people trying to make some extra isk, they are the ones who flood the 'stable' market of players cashing in and selling Datacores.

---

And only the 'fat-cats' can do this, right?

STUFF

---

Quote:

---

CCP Mindstar > Sorry - I've completely messed all that up. lets try again

---

Originally by: De'Veldrin

---

If a person's account goes inactive all activitity on that account should be pulled at the next downtime. All market orders, all agent rewards, all contracts, everything.

---

Originally by: Jimi Tetro

---

Edited by: Jimi Tetro on 08/02/2010 21:50:04
I can't see this happening across the board. Manufacturing Slots, Queues, Failed Jobs etc would all be at the mercy of the billing System and rectifying mistakes might be more hassle than its worth.

---

Originally by: Ai Mei

---

doing this would cause one or more of the following.

Huge increase on plex prices
increase of the price of t2 items
more threads like this

---

Originally by: De'Veldrin

---

Supported.

If a person's account goes inactive all activitity on that account should be pulled at the next downtime. All market orders, all agent rewards, all contracts, everything.

---

Originally by: De'Veldrin

---

If a person's account goes inactive all activitity on that account should be pulled at the next downtime. All market orders, all agent rewards, all contracts, everything.

---

Originally by: Sir Carnage

---

Originally by: Marko Riva

---

Why does that read like they're all 12 and have an IQ of 37?

---

I was under the impression they were 37 and had an IQ of 12

---

Originally by: Bunyip

---

I agree with this and market orders too. If somebody doesn't have an active account, why should they be buying and selling goods.

---

Originally by: Ai Mei

---

Huge increase on plex prices

---

Quote:

---

increase of the price of t2 items

---

Quote:

---

It works great as is, doing this would just stack all the wealth onto the select few who research on their mains.

---

Originally by: Mara Rinn

---

Quote:

---

increase of the price of t2 items

---

Certainly, but as the price of datacores goes up, the folks who aren't farming them will start, won't they? Eventually there will be more paying customers farming datacores, as opposed to inactive alts on unpaid accounts farming datacores. Market will return to present status as PvPers decide to spend the couple of months training to do R&D. There will no doubt be a short term spike in prices as the supply ramps up to meet demand.

---

Originally by: Hirana Yoshida

---

Edited by: Hirana Yoshida on 21/05/2010 10:12:26
...
Summary:
CCP gets one year+ worth of subscription per account provided all three slots are used for this heinous act.
Player spends $210 in GTCs/subscription or roughly 4B ISK in PLEXS to set each account upà.

---

Originally by: CCP Oveur

---

The client handles no logic, it is simply a dumb terminal.

Our problems are server-side.

---

Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow

---

It also made it through the recent crowdsourcing and CSM filtering and is on our list that is being presented to CCP today.

---

Originally by: Trebor Daehdoow

---

Just a quick note -- TeaDaze apparently forgot to post the fact that this passed during CSM4 and is currently listed as "in process" to CCP.

It also made it through the recent crowdsourcing and CSM filtering and is on our list that is being presented to CCP today.

---

Originally by: Yldrad

---

Edited by: Yldrad on 20/08/2010 21:06:38
Issue resolved.

---