Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 .. 11 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Pr1ncess Alia
Caldari Perkone
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 02:36:00 -
[271]
Edited by: Pr1ncess Alia on 23/03/2010 02:36:09
Originally by: Ephemeron Well, logical arguments are amusing, mostly cause they are always based on unproven assumptions
they are based on logic. Logic is an abstract idea for some, we'll move along..
Quote: The rate of increase for combat advantage and clone cost is in no way complimentary of each other. If it was, I would run around mauling low SP ppl in my solopwnmobile bs.
It should cost. We agree there. In my GD thread I've tried to relay logical arguments on what I think would be balanced. Others suggest their own.
What they are suggesting you don't understand is the divide between ship,fit,implant,booster,whatever costs that have a clear and distinct combat advantage and the completely different (see my first 2 sentences here) that simply HAVING SP somehow gains you a near exponential combat advantage.
Originally by: Ephemeron Can you provide example data that would satisfy your definition of "complementary"?
Underlined, italicized and bolded the examples. As for specific data, be that lists of item costs vs combat advantage (say t1 booster vs gisti x-type) graphs or what have you, i'm going to push the burden of proof to you if you feel this is just outrageous carebear lies and no basis of logic. I think we can both agree that simply having SP doesn't gain you any exponential combat advantage? God I hope.
Originally by: Ephemeron
The difference between low level character and high level one is often the amount of level 5 skills vs level 4 skills. That level 5 skill typically means 5% increase in some useful quality. Having a difference of 10 level 5 skills means extra 5% in 10 different qualities. They can add up to quite significant advantage.
Just as faction mods significantly scale in price with each 5% increase in quality over t2 variant, the clone price also increases. But even so, comparing faction mod prices to clone value shows how cheap you pay for the high sp clone. Otherwise 80 mil sp should have cost 50 mil at least. Just to follow the pattern of combat advantage vs price.
Or perhaps do you want to argue that faction prices are not complementary to their usefulness as well?
If I choose to, I can get a sologank battleship and kill low sp, low cost noobies right and left. Perhaps 5 on 1 at a time. It's definitely possible if you know what you are doing. I am pretty sure there are killboard logs that show me doing just that.
Again your making my point. IF you clear up some inconsistencies there anyways....
-level 4 to 5 on one skill is a small increase in combat gain, and I agree the advantages are additive as you accrue them. this is why clone costs should scale upwards. Normal (what most would consider 'must have' level 5s) are already obtained by the time you are 40-60mil SP, and their respective clone costs are rational and reflect that advantage. It doesn't tackle the argument for beyond 100mil SP, not even close.
-faction mods do not increase in small 5% increments, not most anyways. They either allow for a fit not possible otherwise (at small individual combat advantage) OR they display a massive combat gain (run at half the cap cost, whatever).
An important element you didn't include is that our FREE MARKET (as close as we can get) reflects and balances these prices for us to obtain a healthy risk/reward scenario. (that complementary usefulness we agree on).
CCP's list was created at worst arbitrarily and at best short sighted. And who can blame them? The last time they looked at this was 2 years ago and no one was into the digits we are approaching now.
You fitting and flying a sologank bs chaulk full of faction officer mods (as I've seen first hand if you believe it) does provide you an incredible and well deserved (and paid for) advantage. The disparity between cost/benefit of the purchased mods and the SP cost schema remains for all the reasons you almost pointed out correctly.
"A game that is significantly nonlinear is sometimes described as being open-ended or a sandbox, and is characterized by there being no "right way" of playing the game." |
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp. Initiative Associates
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 04:47:00 -
[272]
you give me very little to work with, I'm disappointed.
Most of what you said are opinions, in other words - unproven assumptions. There's very little of actual logic applied.
|
b1zz
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 08:38:00 -
[273]
Originally by: Ephemeron
Quote: Yes I should lose isk when I pvp. Yes I should have to go make isk. You cannot deny the logic that older players that sometimes are looking for a reason to keep playing get a kick to the shins when they want low cost pvp.
(clarify: low cost pvp as in low cost, low ability/survivability ships.... or as you would interpret, ccp just spawning stuff for me for free or whatever wild tangent your shaky logic and poorly thought out arguments take you. Rolling Eyes)
You can already do all that without game modification - each account comes with 2 alts. Those 2 alts can train some basic skills to operate low cost ships, and their clones are going to be very low cost as well.
Alts do not solve this problem. Some players do not buy into the whole alt, multi-boxing, metagaming thing. Why would I want to repeat what I've already done through an alt like I'm on some kind of gaming treadmill anyway, I've been there done that and I have no desire to repeat it.
As I see it, the allowance, if not the all-out encouragement, of multi-boxing alts - which I note you conspicuously neglect to mention - is another reason why the medical clone mechanic should be changed. A meta-gaming multi-boxer has many advantages over the single-toon player, not least of which is that in combat he can present far fewer skill points to his opponent than he actually has on the field. He can get his alts to do many tasks he would otherwise have filled by corp mates or other players. He can avoid many of the game mechanics that were put in place to make pilots accountable for their actions in the game, like wardecs (normal alts too for this one). And on top of this his clone costs are significantly less. Can the single-toon player make up for all this with his skill point concentrated in one character, I don't think so.
Originally by: Ephemeron There is no logically right or wrong answer here. This is ideology. Either you believe in carebearism or you believe in hardcore game style.
There is a logical answer to this. This has nothing to do with idealogy, no matter how desperately you want it to be so, and no matter how many faulty assumptions you want to make about those arguing for change.
There is a game mechanic in place that is restrictive, not reflective of advantage gained, discouraging participation in 0.0, promoting metagaming, and not in the spirit of a sand-box game that promotes choice as its Number 1. feature.
Please fix CCP.
|
Sturmwolke
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 12:46:00 -
[274]
Originally by: Bloodwolf Why do I get the impression that you only answer questions with questions? But although you did not answer any of my questions I will answer yours before I am off for a week.
Putting the cart before the horse is your way of doing things I take it?
Originally by: Bloodwolf 1. Did I say that? I think the real problem is after 20m clone cost. After 60m skillpoints all you get is a little more diversity and as a drawback a geometric increase in clone cost. Yay for that!
So, you think the real problem is after 20mil clones cost? Looking at the current scale, then you think the real problem is for players OVER 92mil SP yes? OR do wish to say that 13mil isk for a 71mil SP clone is too expensive?
Make up your mind.
Originally by: Bloodwolf
2. I choose the clone cost of 20m as a worst case scenario. Actually I choose it that high in your favor, too bad you didnt notice. If we assume the average clone cost is at 10m than the resulting high end clone cost which would work well in the long run would have been much lower than 20m as well.
The average clone cost is ALREADY between 7.8-13 mil isk for between 54-71mil SP. That's for a 2-3 year old character. So, tell the forum, what average are you referring to here?
Originally by: Bloodwolf
3. I suppose they are by no means a majority right now. But that is the problem they are getting more by the second. When I had 92m skillpoints I would not have started this thread. But seemingly there are now enough players with a problem that they keep this topic alive.
History has shown that CCP adjusts and moves the clone cost scale accordingly when the need arises. Thank you for your concern, any more complaints? .. OR Would you like to change the topic to "(Current) Clone costs - They're Too Expensive For PVP For the Avg Players"?
Make up your mind.
Originally by: Bloodwolf
4. How should I know? Playing guessing games is probably not going to help. But no matter what they skilled they all bear the same clone costs.
On the contrary, whatever the numbers, the split reduces the number of characters > 92mil SP out there being used actively in 0.0 combat. It distills down to having CCP make gameplay exceptions to these handful few who feels that their playing field needs to be levelled against the average players.
And while they're at it, kill two birds with one stone by suggesting an inane lowering across the board for the entire clone cost scale. Who knows, lemmings might throw in their support as 0.0 PVP cost gets nerfed. They'd like that.
Imagine how powerful a strategic value that > 92 mil SP character holds over their lesser more specialized brethren. Without major penalties to podding, re-shipping in different ships won't burn up too much isk from clone costs. Universal power creep from just changing high scale clone cost for the few players.
Originally by: Bloodwolf
5. I am not posting here to solve the problem once and for all. I am merely stating that there is a problem that should be adressed. And I am giving pointers as to what effect which prices have on a players incentive to fly certain ship classes.
There is NO problem with the current clone cost. The problem lies between the chair and the keyboard.
|
Sturmwolke
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 13:03:00 -
[275]
Edited by: Sturmwolke on 23/03/2010 13:04:04
Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia For the umpteenth time, I'm not suggesting ZERGING HIGH SP CHARS FALLING FROM THE SKY as a previous knucklehead suggested, but I should be able to fly a ceptor in 0.0 without knowing one mistake and I'm losing (without implants) many magnitudes more isk than a ceptor loss is intended to cost someone.
Oh was that in my reference? I don't see your replies to my prev post. Knucklehead? And you're suing people with ad-hominem attacks? Tut tut tut ...
Back on track, I don't see your reply and I especially don't see any reasonable suggestions whatsover coming from you that's doesn't involve an inane lowering of clone cost across the board with proper justifications.
Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia
You say that added clone costs is intended, I say it isn't and we yell until CCP clarifies /rinse & repeat
Yes dear, keep up your whining.
Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia
The cost for pvp loss is there. You wanna fly rich, fly rich. You wanna fly cheap, fly cheap ..... UNLESS YOU ARE A HIGH SP CHAR, then go play alts online? Eat the loss because the punishment is expected for 6 years of dedication to my main?
Quantify me the cost please. I want to see the figure.
Begin with: - your character's SP - go fly Rifters - how many times do you you get podded on avg per month - where were you podded - your avg EVE income level
edit: missing word |
Tulisin Dragonflame
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 13:42:00 -
[276]
Originally by: Ephemeron There is no logically right or wrong answer here. This is ideology. Either you believe in carebearism or you believe in hardcore game style.
No amount of arguments is going to turn me carebear
Stop trying to divert the debate. This has little to do with the risk of losing a clone and a lot to do with the arbitrary nature of how that risk is applied.
As I've said before, making all clones cost 100 mil would be better, since it at least would remove the arbitrary application of risk that is indicative of *bad game design*.
In fact, removing clones altogether so you lose SP 100 % of the time you're podkilled would be a better system than arbitrarily raising clone costs. In short: This has nothing to do with carebearism.
|
Pr1ncess Alia
Caldari Perkone
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 13:58:00 -
[277]
Originally by: Sturmwolke
Oh was that in my reference? I don't see your replies to my prev post. Knucklehead? And you're suing people with ad-hominem attacks? Tut tut tut ...
Ad hominem attack the person instead of the argument. I didn't discount your argument because your a knucklhead, I called you a knucklehead because of your ridiculous 'zerging high sp chars' argument. That is the opposite.
Originally by: Sturmwolke Back on track, I don't see your reply and I especially don't see any reasonable suggestions whatsover coming from you that's doesn't involve an inane lowering of clone cost across the board with proper justifications.
That would be because the "inane lowering of clone cost" at the top of the board (not across, and with proper justifications) IS MY suggested fix.
There are several others here that have suggested solutions that do NOT require lowering costs but mitigating them through other avenues. If they are good, I've said so and agreed they would be excellent alternatives to my particular solution.
Rtft
Originally by: Sturmwolke
Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia
You say that added clone costs is intended, I say it isn't and we yell until CCP clarifies /rinse & repeat
Yes dear, keep up your whining.
A man whines because another man is whining. Who is the greatest whiner?
Originally by: Sturmwolke
Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia
The cost for pvp loss is there. You wanna fly rich, fly rich. You wanna fly cheap, fly cheap ..... UNLESS YOU ARE A HIGH SP CHAR, then go play alts online? Eat the loss because the punishment is expected for 6 years of dedication to my main?
Quantify me the cost please. I want to see the figure.
Begin with: - your character's SP - go fly Rifters, T2 inties, dictors or other tin-can ships - how many times do you get podded on avg per month - where were you podded - your avg EVE income level
edit: missing/double word/clarity
You do like to answer questions with questions/demands. Did you expect me to do this and report back in a month? Or just start placing estimates? (which would work ok)
Want to see the figures? Run them. We are all here waiting. There is no need to place the burden of proof to me, I hold no secret numbers. You can easily estimate all of the above and build a case of how a 100mil sp character deserves to pay XX more than a 60mil SP char with likely the exact same SP dedicated to each ship.
Formulate the argument on your own if you want to have one. I know it's harder than just demanding things from people you don't like and answering questions with questions.
If you can't find anywhere in my many and way too wordy responses the disparity between small ship cost vs combat gain and SP clone cost vs combat gain I apologize and won't try to confuse you further.
Read a bit, I've written a lot and I apologize if I haven't answered each of your specific demands. There are several people I'm trying to reply to. Try to apply some of those posts to answer your questions, the answers are in there .
"A game that is significantly nonlinear is sometimes described as being open-ended or a sandbox, and is characterized by there being no "right way" of playing the game." |
Laechyd Eldgorn
Caldari Cruoris Seraphim Exalted.
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 14:07:00 -
[278]
I think all poasts are going to drown in all becoming 100 pages, but imho clone costs shouldn't be so much after lets say 30-50mil sp since isk you gain is not relative to sp at all at that point.
10mil for clone okay, everyone can live with that but higher, meh. What's the point. Instead of punishing those who actually go out and put their clones/ships in risk lets get somtehing else tbh :p
|
Pr1ncess Alia
Caldari Perkone
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 14:19:00 -
[279]
Originally by: Sturmwolke
History has shown that CCP adjusts and moves the clone cost scale accordingly when the need arises. Thank you for your concern, any more complaints? .. OR Would you like to change the topic to "(Current) Clone costs - They're Too Expensive For PVP For the Avg Players"?
Make up your mind.
On the contrary, whatever the numbers, the split reduces the number of characters > 92mil SP out there being used actively in 0.0 combat. It distills down to having CCP make gameplay exceptions to these handful few who feels that their playing field needs to be levelled against the average players.
CCP moves the bar when they feel it's needed. Apparently suggesting after 2 years CCP revisit the topic is absolute madness. I like my topic right where it's at. Try to stay focused on it.
No one has suggested CCP make gameplay exceptions. The slippery slope crap is old, never works and only discredits whatever point you were trying to make.
Do you suggest that the argument only becomes valid once the average player base is facing these costs?
Originally by: Sturmwolke
And while they're at it, kill two birds with one stone by suggesting an inane lowering across the board for the entire clone cost scale. Who knows, lemmings might throw in their support as 0.0 PVP cost gets nerfed. They'd like that.
Imagine how powerful a strategic value that > 92 mil SP character holds over their lesser more specialized brethren. Without major penalties to podding, re-shipping in different ships won't burn up too much isk from clone costs. Universal power creep from just changing high scale clone cost for the few players.
The slippery slope crap is old, never works and only discredits whatever point you were trying to make.
Skill versatility is a valid point as we've mentioned several times this thread. This is one of the reasons costs should continue to go up, not stick at some static rate. We aren't arguing this, only the cost/benefit balance for these clone costs. Your opinion here is every bit as valid as mine.
Universal power creep? Does this have something to do with my thetans?
"A game that is significantly nonlinear is sometimes described as being open-ended or a sandbox, and is characterized by there being no "right way" of playing the game." |
meat vapour
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 14:49:00 -
[280]
chriiiiiiist... this thread is still going....!
raison d'etre much...?
|
|
Klam
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 17:32:00 -
[281]
Originally by: Estel Arador Edited by: Estel Arador on 15/03/2010 13:08:47 Not only do clones get more expensive in absolute terms, they also get more expensive in relative terms
SP saved (in Millions) per million isk.
Omega 3,0 Psi 2,9 Chi 2,9 Phi 3,1 Upsilon 3,4 Tau 4,0 Sigma 4,6 Rho 5,4 Pi 6,9 Omicron10,9 Xi10,7 Nu12,5 Mu14,3 Lambda15,9 Kappa17,7 Iota18,9 Theta20,4 Eta20,8 Zeta21,7 Epsilon21,9 Delta20,0 Gamma17,7 Beta12,0
This is the problem.
While I have no problem with it getting more expensive. The curve makes it very painful to be active in PvP.
Actually I have a very simple solution ... You are going to want to kill me and/or laugh.
I suggest they add a moderately expensive skill to reduce the cost of medical clones. PvPers would train it / PvE would not. Maybe a 200million isk skillbook. With a 8x or 10x difficulty.
Infomorph Psychology 5 would be the prereq.
Done and Done .... can I have my cookie now?
|
b1zz
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 18:25:00 -
[282]
No, no cookie for you.
PvE'ers get podded all the time, maybe even more so that PvP'ers, en-route to their missions. PvE'ers also PvP. Just another compulsory skill to train I'm afraid, and we don't want those.
|
Tippia
Reikoku IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 18:34:00 -
[283]
Originally by: b1zz PvE'ers get podded all the time, maybe even more so that PvP'ers, en-route to their missions.
——— “If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡… you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.” — Karath Piki |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2010.03.23 18:42:00 -
[284]
Originally by: b1zz No, no cookie for you.
PvE'ers get podded all the time, maybe even more so that PvP'ers, en-route to their missions. PvE'ers also PvP. Just another compulsory skill to train I'm afraid, and we don't want those.
|
Sturmwolke
|
Posted - 2010.03.24 12:27:00 -
[285]
Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia Ad hominem attack the person instead of the argument. I didn't discount your argument because your a knucklhead, I called you a knucklehead because of your ridiculous 'zerging high sp chars' argument. That is the opposite.
Oh? You find "zergin high sp chars" argument ridiculous? - no counter argument to say HOW is it ridiculous - called someone a knucklehead
Ergo ad hominem. Would you like to try and spin that again Miss Pot?
Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia
That would be because the "inane lowering of clone cost" at the top of the board (not across, and with proper justifications) IS MY suggested fix.
There are several others here that have suggested solutions that do NOT require lowering costs but mitigating them through other avenues. If they are good, I've said so and agreed they would be excellent alternatives to my particular solution.
As the chief instigator, your solution reflects whats in your mind for starting the crusade. I'd doubt you're interested in any reasonable suggestions, it's a simple matter of drown the unwanted and prop up the wanted.
The whole premise of this push is about making allowances for very old players to PVP in cheap ships, in 0.0. Note the 0.0 bold underline and don't forget that. Qualifying for 0.0 operations demand a certain amount of commitment, both time and risk taking but it also pays well enough to those that know how to milk it.
ANY suggestions put forward that lowers the penalty from the current status quo would be technically a buff. From a balance point, those suggestions would be unacceptable because it's simply one-sided. To overcome this, you need to run it across the board, which ends up for being unacceptable as well because it's nearly FOC.
Do you get my drift?
Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia
A man whines because another man is whining. Who is the greatest whiner?
Err .. wasn't it you that started the thread (both here and in AH) about wanting lollipops? So you win the title "greatest".
I lose
Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia You do like to answer questions with questions/demands. Did you expect me to do this and report back in a month? Or just start placing estimates? (which would work ok)
Want to see the figures? Run them. We are all here waiting. There is no need to place the burden of proof to me, I hold no secret numbers.
The world doesn't work that way my dear. You came running to GD and AH crying about clone costs, giving fallacious reasonings and throwing tantrums. Any real proposal to open the discussion would have included these number details beforehand. You're effectively relying on the public to do your homework, while you sit tight saying "YES!" to the ones you like and "NO!" to the ones that you don't like.
Make no mistake. The burden of proof is always on whomever that brought the original proposal/idea. Don't like it, well I hear it's tough to whiners.
Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia
No one has suggested CCP make gameplay exceptions. The slippery slope crap is old, never works and only discredits whatever point you were trying to make. Do you suggest that the argument only becomes valid once the average player base is facing these costs?
Oh? what is this slippery slope crap that you're so intent on applying to the argument?
Asking to lower the status quo ISK penalties for the few is directly construed as making exceptions for the few. It's that simple. No amount suggestions, whether applied directly or indirectly should trade this penalty cost for time or anything else at a lower exchange rate. If you do so, you're ASKING CCP TO MAKE GAMEPLAY EXCEPTIONS.
How CCP calculates the average clone costs based on the average players is open to discussion. However, make no mistake, there are formulae & considerations involved. It's not arbitrary as some empty headed nincompoop argues. |
Istvaan Shogaatsu
Caldari Guiding Hand Social Club
|
Posted - 2010.04.02 00:09:00 -
[286]
Whiners will whine.
|
Mr Kidd
|
Posted - 2010.04.04 12:16:00 -
[287]
I can't believe THIS thread has gone on THIS long. Damn you high sp'ers are major whiners. Look, you have every advantage. Presumably you can mission at +50mil isk/hr. There's no sympathy here for you. What you're really asking for are MORE ADVANTAGES. You've made it this far and you don't realize that in Eve you have to work for EVERYTHING? HTFU! HTFU! HTFU! HTFU! HTFU! HTFU! HTFU! HTFU! HTFU! HTFU!
If having such a uber SP character is that much of a PITA, then create an alt, train it up, but no too far or we'll have to hear more whining, and then SELL your uber SP character that's costing you so much isk in clones for tonnes of more isk. Otherwise, HTFU, STFU, KMA!
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2010.04.04 13:27:00 -
[288]
Originally by: Mr Kidd I can't believe THIS thread has gone on THIS long. Damn you high sp'ers are major whiners.
Most "high SPer" players think that the OP is a terrible crybaby who should learn2play.
Less than 3 months to go till my clone cost hits 20 mill. That extra 7 mill on top of the 130M HAC, 30-40M fittings and 50M in implants is gonna make a huge difference to me
How the hell am I supposed to generate an extra 49 million ISK this year?
|
Laedy
|
Posted - 2010.04.04 14:31:00 -
[289]
I like being able to fly my T1 frigs into 0.0, getting into a quick fight then dieing terribly to a bubble camp (and getting a short trip home via podding).
I'm really not looking forward to my clone costing 3x the worth of my ship
|
Roastedpot
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
|
Posted - 2010.04.04 14:39:00 -
[290]
my opinion on the matter isnt of any importance, but since clone costs are one of the few things that have remained unchanged and we are now on the 7th or so year of eve, it may be worth ccp's time to at least look and see if this is how they still envision the direction of the game going. if yes, then fine, if no then i save some money, cools.
|
|
Bloodwolf
M.A.R.S. Enterprises
|
Posted - 2010.04.04 15:37:00 -
[291]
Originally by: Roastedpot my opinion on the matter isnt of any importance, but since clone costs are one of the few things that have remained unchanged and we are now on the 7th or so year of eve, it may be worth ccp's time to at least look and see if this is how they still envision the direction of the game going. if yes, then fine, if no then i save some money, cools.
An interesting point to think about is that those higher end clone costs did not have an effect on the playerbase until recently. So it is not only a matter of taking a look at a game balance which worked well for years. As players get more and more skillpoints we are leaving the old situation. In the next years this will certainly lead to an increasing incentive against the use of cheaper ships.
@Malcanis Most High SP Players think the OP is talking nonsense? Really? Who are they? Why should they think that? Ahhh of course you mean the vocal part of the people that post here and actually spent time training low cost pvp alts perhaps... I can understand their anguish if they actually did that. I do not think that a realistic representation of the player base actually bothers to post here instead of playing. But I still do believe that it is necessary to discuss this whole matter with whoever is interested.
And to say it once again the main problem is not the clone cost as a money sink. But the restrictive application of this money sink. Why discourage people to fly cheap ships into pvp? Why is that benefical to game balance?
I am quite impressed that there are still people who cry whiners! crybabys! carebears! all the time. Do you actually realize that you are out of arguments? There are some people who actually think about rules that are imposed on them. Instead of just accepting them even if they do not seem to make any sense. In fact it would be nice to have someone disagree with some points stated by the supporting faction. But alas replies usally are on the level of name calling and asking questions that were answered before.
|
Ard UnjiiGo
The Tuskers
|
Posted - 2010.04.04 15:49:00 -
[292]
Nearly 50mil SP player weighing in:
OP and his ilk are embarrassing themselves.
|
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2010.04.04 15:55:00 -
[293]
Originally by: Ard UnjiiGo Nearly 50mil SP player weighing in:
OP and his ilk are embarrassing themselves.
I have more SP than you. I think you are embarrassing forum posters in general.
Wherever you went - Here you are.
|
Bloodwolf
M.A.R.S. Enterprises
|
Posted - 2010.04.04 16:05:00 -
[294]
Originally by: Ard UnjiiGo Nearly 50mil SP player weighing in:
OP and his ilk are embarrassing themselves.
So that is your opinion? In an effort to add some information value to this statement, would you care to explain why you think that?
Although with 50m SP you do not really experience the problem of not wanting to use smaller ships... just imagine how it would be to have 150m SP ... and then start pondering about the reason for that. You will most likely be as strong as you are now for most pvp situations.. but you will have to pay an ever increasing amount of money. And the reason being? I am certain that all of the people who support a change would be willing to pay more for higher skillpoint clones, but the current rates are overdoing it.
A point to note is that even among supporters there are some differences as to what they want. The small ship pvp thing is surely something that most people would agree on, if they did not carefully and painstakingly made their own small time pvp alt. The other problem are the higher end clone costs in general. Naturally this one is more likely to have people disagree upon. But it is still a valid point of discussion. Sadly there are not really that many people who actually spill the beans why they are against a change in the cost scheme. Maybe they do not want to admit that they have strong sp envy? Or they do not want to have lost time training multiple chars?
|
Ard UnjiiGo
The Tuskers
|
Posted - 2010.04.04 16:13:00 -
[295]
Check my KB stats whiners above me.
My most commonly lost ship is a pod.
My most commonly used ships for the past year or so are frigates.
I have lived in low-sec since I was a 2 day old character.
That gives me plenty of real game standing to call you out for being crap players if the clone cost really cramps your ability to be successful in this game.
|
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2010.04.04 17:41:00 -
[296]
Edited by: Ghoest on 04/04/2010 17:42:07
Originally by: Ard UnjiiGo LOOK AT MT ELECTRIC BALLS EVERYONE!!! LOOK LOOK THEY ARE GREAT BIG!!!
So your first post was just a set up for your second post. I see now. Very nice.
Wherever you went - Here you are.
|
Bloodwolf
M.A.R.S. Enterprises
|
Posted - 2010.04.04 18:29:00 -
[297]
Edited by: Bloodwolf on 04/04/2010 18:29:18
Originally by: Ard UnjiiGo Edited by: Ard UnjiiGo on 04/04/2010 16:19:43 Check my KB stats whiners above me.
My most commonly lost ship is a pod.
My most commonly used ships for the past year or so are frigates.
I have lived in low-sec since I was a 2 day old character.
That gives me plenty of real game standing to call you out for being crap players if the clone cost really cramps your ability to be successful in this game.
Edit: Since 75% or more of my isk is done through ransoms and loot sales and I still don't have a problem keeping myself in a decent amount of isk, I know I will still think of you as a sad whiner when I have 150mil SPs.
l2p
Actually learn to play is not the problem. Because clone costs do not necessarily cramp our abilities to be successful.. they just rule out the use of frigs, cruisers and other cheap ships at some point. The problem lies before even buying the ship. You do realize that it is irrational to pvp in a frig or a cruiser with 150m SP dont you?
It doesnt even matter if you get killed at all. If you think before you use a ship you will come to the conclusion that cheaper ships are not feasible anymore thus reducing their usage without any reason for doing so. This was not a problem as long as the effect was weak. But it cant be called weak anymore if you reach a 150 million skillpoints.
Good for you that you are swimming in isk. Are you swimming in enough isk to throw it away on fun cruiser pvp if the clone costs increase in the future? Good for you... some people might be as well. But there are certainly a lot more that would not pvp if it means spending more than they have to. Therefore they will choose a more expensive ship which gives them added survivability. Sucks for those who actually like to fly frigs and are against irrational spending of money. Maybe it is really intended to use alts for that. I would be delighted if someone told me why this is a good thing. Usally restrictive rules are there for a reason... im still searching for this one.
|
Mac Maniac
Caldari Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 20:00:00 -
[298]
Nearly 80mil SP player weighing in:
OP and his ilk are embarrassing themselves.
/agreed
If you can't run with the big dogs.. Don't get off the porch
|
Gorefacer
Caldari Resurrection Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2010.04.09 23:42:00 -
[299]
Originally by: Bloodwolf
Actually learn to play is not the problem. Because clone costs do not necessarily cramp our abilities to be successful.. they just rule out the use of frigs, cruisers and other cheap ships at some point. The problem lies before even buying the ship. You do realize that it is irrational to pvp in a frig or a cruiser with 150m SP dont you?
It doesnt even matter if you get killed at all. If you think before you use a ship you will come to the conclusion that cheaper ships are not feasible anymore thus reducing their usage without any reason for doing so. This was not a problem as long as the effect was weak. But it cant be called weak anymore if you reach a 150 million skillpoints.
Good for you that you are swimming in isk. Are you swimming in enough isk to throw it away on fun cruiser pvp if the clone costs increase in the future? Good for you... some people might be as well. But there are certainly a lot more that would not pvp if it means spending more than they have to. Therefore they will choose a more expensive ship which gives them added survivability. Sucks for those who actually like to fly frigs and are against irrational spending of money. Maybe it is really intended to use alts for that. I would be delighted if someone told me why this is a good thing. Usally restrictive rules are there for a reason... im still searching for this one.
Had CCP arbitrarily chosen a slightly less steep increase curve in pod prices as SP goes up I wouldn't be here arguing that they should be higher. It's not that CCP chose the exact right prices for clones and anything higher is too much and anything lower is too little. I just don't see a good reason to lower the prices for high SP characters to some other arbitrary lower figure per clone cost. You get benefits from the SP you train and you have to pay for them. This basic concept seems absolutely fair and the current clone costs don't seem high enough to me to be restrictive enough to invalidate the value of the SP you pay for so why should be people pay less for it?
Saying that high clone costs "rule out" the use of whatever ship is ridiculous. The benefit of being a high SP player and being the game long enough to accrue those SP is that you should have the ISK and skills to do and fly whatever you want. If you aren't willing to fly frigs or whatever that is a personal choice and not really anything to do with clone costs as plenty of people with the same clone costs are more than willing to do what you are not.
Not only are those SP worth every ISK you have to spend on clones, even for those mega penny pinchers there are avenues of choice in the game to slow or stop SP gain. Basically the SP is worth training to you or not and you are given a choice of one or the other. The vast majority will continue to train the SP as the benefits outweigh the costs. There are many activities in the game that cost more ISK than some people are willing to spend on it, this is normal and does not always call for game changing measures to be taken.
If CCP down the line at some point do decide to lower clone costs it won't ruin the game for me in any way. In this case it's not so much that I have a good reason why I think the proposed changes should NOT be made but more that I don't see any good reasons why it SHOULD be made. Your argument of relatively expensive t1 frigate losses don't move me.
"You can't reason someone out of a belief they haven't reasoned themselves into" - Prometheus
|
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp. Initiative Associates
|
Posted - 2010.04.10 05:29:00 -
[300]
Edited by: Ephemeron on 10/04/2010 05:29:15
I'd say we should have an option for people to play in "pussy" mode - all clones under 1 mil. But their character name would come with prefex *Pussy*
So every time they chat or somebody looks up their info, they can see that.
How about it?
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 .. 11 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |