EVE Search - Clone Costs - Punishing veterans for continuing to play?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Clone Costs - Punishing veterans for continuing to play?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Tulisin Dragonflame	Posted - 2010.03.18 02:34:00 - [181] Originally by: Scarlet Crimson IMO clone upgrades should be paid for as you progress ( as it is ), but once it is all your clones should have it included. Nothing says "I quit", like a player loosing years worth of training ( and monthy payments )due to this. I do not care how nub or scrub you think that person may be for not having the iskies or forgetting to pay before leaving the station, the consequence is to high to be deserved for being a "dumbass". Another idea I could get on board with. Make people pay huge increasing fees every 10 million SP, but don't charge to buy a high-end clone each time they get podded, removing the passive additional risk.
Tulisin Dragonflame	Posted - 2010.03.18 02:39:00 - [182] Originally by: Mara Rinn Which means it's also time to remind people about the usual EVE combat pilox maxims: Don't fly what you can't afford to lose; Don't carry cargo worth more than the hull; Spend as much on the tank as you did on the hull. 120m ISK clones means you just have to be serious about logging in. Roll a FW alt if you want casual pew-pew. What makes the first maxim work is the choice to fly something cheap. We tell new players not to bring their first HAC right into PvP because they can't afford to lose it. Instead, use a cruiser to get a feel for things. As you pointed out, the only way to choose to deter the risk of having a high-end clone is...to make an alt? Being able to do whatever you want, including train for and fly a lower-end ship, is one of the core principles of EVE. Having to make alts to participate is just pathetic. At the risk of repeating myself: Would it be acceptable if insurance returns dropped with increasing SP? Arbitrarily making you risk more ISK because you've spent more time on one character instead of using alts.
Pr1ncess Alia Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2010.03.18 04:29:00 - [183] Originally by: Professor Tarantula Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 17/03/2010 17:53:53 Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia "well be more active and make more isk then", that is fair and I'm not knocking your point. But pvp loss is STILL there through so many avenues, the current rate of clone costs is silly.... ...All the fears and slippery slope interpretations regarding clone costs simply don't hold water. But they aren't that silly. At 100+ SP you should be flying something worth at least a billion isk, and have implants worth a small fortune as well, so getting podded and having to pay for a new clone is really the least of your losses. It's also easy to avoid situations where you might be killed if you can't afford it. As for the slippery slope thing, it is a valid point. Look at how people just want more and more time on the skillqueue now that we have one. Even changing the model for the scorpion made people insist it be done to all other asymmetrical ships. For the record i do agree with your main point, although only in relation to the very high end clone prices, but sadly it's in the best interests of CCP to stick to their guns on this matter because it would only inspire crowds of people to start making similar demands ad nauseum. so... If you have high SP you should automatically fly billions of $$ anyways (and have that, because you don't fly what you can't afford to lose). also, not dying in pvp is easy (empire/low sec, i can agree w/ this but have you ever been to 0.0????) something something dark side, something something scorpion & if ccp makes smart changes to the game, next thing you know people will expect them to continue to make smart changes to their game (like they try to do year after year, they love smart feedback, it's the reason we have forums they read, csm, etc) you seem to both subscribe to logical fallacies like it's opposite day AND believe the game shouldn't be improved in any way (or at least not changed because the player base pointed out the flaw) wow. that is just something else right there. yes, there are stupid requests and decent requests. opinions always differ on where these things lay, but this is the process of discussing these things. how the hell did you ever get convinced suggesting changes in and of itself is somehow a bad thing? oh right. I'm crying and not at all attempting to suggest something rational. just Originally by: Sig Sour THIS THREAD all day long. watertight argument you have there.
Patri Andari Caldari Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer	Posted - 2010.03.18 04:55:00 - [184] Originally by: Karl Marx From each according to his ability, to each according to his need Right? Right?! Patri I'll Roshambo you for that Titan
b1zz	Posted - 2010.03.18 05:12:00 - [185] Originally by: James Tritanius Edited by: James Tritanius on 17/03/2010 17:40:25 Originally by: b1zz OP has a point. 3 year old character has max skills for: Rifter Tristan Merlin Punisher 6 month old character has max skills for: Rifter From a 1v1 standpoint the 6 month old character has few disadvatages, just less choice as to which ship he chooses for the engagement, and yet his clone cost is much much lower. The basic point is that you should not be punished for loyalty to the game; you should be rewarded, not with dominance over younger toons, but with more freedom and choice within the game. The clone cost system certainly needs some improvements, possibly at the top-end costs should be starting to plateau as the technology reaches perfection stage. So here's your argument, condensed: " - A 3-year old character in a Rifter is as effective as a 6-month old character in a Rifter. - Since their effectiveness is the same, their risk should also be the same - The 3-year old character risks more in clone costs. (Problem) > Therefore, the logical solution to this problem is to make clone costs constant for both players. " Do you see any problems with it? That's neither a condensed or accurate version of what I wrote. I think you'd be better off just reading what I wrote and having a think about it rather than trying to re-interpret it to fit your own argument. I did not say that older toons should pay the same as younger toons for clones, just not stupid amounts more, like 30x. Lets bring the clone costs in line with the actual advantage gained. Originally by: Mara Rinn As you grow in SP, you should be growing your passive/AFK ISK generation capacity. Look man, the economy simply cannot sustain every older toon in 10xbillionaire wealth. As the game ages there will be more and more older toons trying to grab a bigger piece of an ever dwindling pie. Originally by: Mara Rinn Are people seriously complaining about 120M ISK for a clone, when the clone they just lost is likely to have a billion ISK of implants, flying a billion ISK ship with about a billion ISK of faction/deadspace fittings? Don't base your arguments on silly assumptions. And if everyone did the above then what's your problem: dropping clone costs from 120M to 30M would be a drop in the ocean, have very little effect on risk, and therefore reasonably acceptable. Originally by: Mara Rinn Which means it's also time to remind people about the usual EVE combat pilox maxims: Don't fly what you can't afford to lose It's been stated several times in this thread that not flying what you can't afford to lose is not applicable to this debate. That maxim refers to when you have a choice: expensive powerful ship with the risk of loss, or cheap weak ship with no risk of loss. The older toons have no choice, they must risk big every time they undock simply because they've been playing the game longer. If they fly a cheap weak ship they're still risking big. In essence they are prohibited from participating in half the game.
Ephemeron Retribution Corp. Initiative Associates	Posted - 2010.03.18 05:52:00 - [186] Quote: The older toons have no choice, they must risk big every time they undock simply because they've been playing the game longer. If they fly a cheap weak ship they're still risking big. In essence they are prohibited from participating in half the game. They do have a choice. They can simply not buy expensive clones. They can choose not to train sp past certain point. They can sell their high sp char for billions and buy cheap low sp char with lots of money left over. Nobody forces you to buy expensive clones. If you are just a cheap lazy bastard, there are options in EVE for you.
b1zz	Posted - 2010.03.18 06:02:00 - [187] I see no choice there Ephemeron. You've stated three 'choices' that are the same: old toon, you are forbidden from progressing beyond this point. What you're really saying is that you want older toons to be brought back to younger toons.
Einstein FTW	Posted - 2010.03.18 06:56:00 - [188] Seems that people have forgotten that there is more this game than Combat PvP, there is also Market PvP(Orders and Contracts) I have nearly 30M SP and the only combat ship I can fly is a frigate. I can also fly a Iteron V/Obelisk/Orca/Hulk. but those ships are only there in order to fuel my real passion in the game, RESEARCH and Market PvP :) Over 7M of my SP are in Science, 3.3M in Leadership, 2.8M in Social and 2.5M in Learning. That's over half of my SP. Most of my Science Skills are only at 3 so I still have plenty to learn there. I would not be surprised if I hit that 60 to 70M SP point and still be only be able to fly a frigate. So if I get podded whilst flying about probably transporting BPO/BPCs in a rookie ship, I have to get a clone that is worth how much? Aparently by the time I'm that level of SP I'm meant to be flying a Tech 2 BS?
Typhado3 Minmatar	Posted - 2010.03.18 07:02:00 - [189] Originally by: Einstein FTW Seems that people have forgotten that there is more this game than Combat PvP, there is also Market PvP(Orders and Contracts) I have nearly 30M SP and the only combat ship I can fly is a frigate. I can also fly a Iteron V/Obelisk/Orca/Hulk. but those ships are only there in order to fuel my real passion in the game, RESEARCH and Market PvP :) Over 7M of my SP are in Science, 3.3M in Leadership, 2.8M in Social and 2.5M in Learning. That's over half of my SP. Most of my Science Skills are only at 3 so I still have plenty to learn there. I would not be surprised if I hit that 60 to 70M SP point and still be only be able to fly a frigate. So if I get podded whilst flying about probably transporting BPO/BPCs in a rookie ship, I have to get a clone that is worth how much? Aparently by the time I'm that level of SP I'm meant to be flying a Tech 2 BS? carrier I'm pretty sure at that level but don't worry you don't need a clone for those worthless sp you can just let them dissapear. however these sp give you way too much of an advantage over younger players therefore you have to pay a massive clone cost to keep things in balance. and they say eve players are smart sometimes I love these forums. ------------------------------ God is an afk cloaker
Pr1ncess Alia Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2010.03.18 07:08:00 - [190] Edited by: Pr1ncess Alia on 18/03/2010 07:15:36 Originally by: Ephemeron They do have a choice. They can simply not buy expensive clones. They can choose not to train sp past certain point. They can sell their high sp char for billions and buy cheap low sp char with lots of money left over. Nobody forces you to buy expensive clones. If you are just a cheap lazy bastard, there are options in EVE for you. Yes, this is obviously an option everyone should jump at. In no way would just buying a 20mil SP clone for your 120mil SP char (deciding to lose SP to offset clone costs) be construed as an even worse punishment than the unbalanced clone costs we're already discussing. You could make a career out of being intentionally obtuse. Originally by: Typhado3 however these sp give you way too much of an advantage over younger players therefore you have to pay a massive clone cost to keep things in balance. Actually the advantage those massive SP give you over someone with a fraction of the SP dedicated to the same ships is in no way reflected by the costs themselves. If I obtained some exponential advantage over a pilot with less than half my SP then this argument would have weight. As I pointed out earlier you CAN make the case of the SP volume providing significant versatility, however real combat advantage in any situation is minimal (and one of the good things about this game). At this point it becomes pure opinion over what that versatility should be worth. The counter point to the OP is that the current scale (which was likely chosen arbitrarily until anyone can point us to CCP suggesting otherwise) is perfect for... whatever reason, where as we are suggesting FREE CLONES FOR EVERYONE OVER 100MIL SP!!! ...oh no wait, we are simply suggesting a linear rate increase, which is obviously MADNESS
Nathanial Victor Minmatar	Posted - 2010.03.18 17:25:00 - [191] I like the idea as long as the clones aren't too cheap. It should still cost a good bit to get podded. Truth is, once you have been playing that long the cost shouldn't bother you much. Suggestion? Specify the tone of the argument to current clone costs punish older characters that don't play often. It doesn't take much time to make the isk we are talking about. I would be interested in CCP explaining how they decided on the cost schema we have today. I doubt they decided current rates by pulling numbers from a hat.
Sargon I	Posted - 2010.03.18 18:19:00 - [192] /shrug it's just a matter of how much ccp wants to promote 0.0 And to the guy saying, 'anyone who can't make 30m an hour is just fail' lololol. Maybe I can, maybe I can't. Either way, I'm not going to grind isk for 90 minutes just because I got stuck in a bubble, where it requires absolutely no skill/twitch reflex to pod someone. And that 90 minutes is before I even start covering the cost of the ship I lost, which ofc is fair play. Simply allowing pods to warp out of bubbles with nontargeted warp jamming invulnerability like t3s would solve any reasonable complaint about this and would make the debate over clone costs moot. If you can't be bubbled in a pod and still get podded, well then you deserve to shell out for the expensive clone. In fact, this idea is so awesome I would actually go back to 0.0. Until then, my expensive, yet implantless, clone and I will stay in lowsec, the real endgame, thanks.
Tornicks Caldari U-208 Blade.	Posted - 2010.03.18 18:55:00 - [193] Agree to the OP.
Bloodwolf M.A.R.S. Enterprises	Posted - 2010.03.18 22:27:00 - [194] I agree with the OP.. What many do not understand, this is not about the money sink. The problem is that veteran player have a negative incentive to use cheap ships, like for example used in frig pvp or cruiser pvp or something. This is only restricting choices and not balancing anything. This is somehow like very old Vampires in World of Darkness where they are only awake and around for shorter and shorter amounts of time. That there is an incentive to create alts for use in fun events like frig and cruiser pvp is not helping anyone. In the long run there will even be a strong incentive to use a second character with a frozen set of skills for any kind of sub capital pvp.
Gorefacer Caldari Resurrection Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2010.03.18 23:24:00 - [195] Originally by: Tulisin Dragonflame Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton Originally by: Tulisin Dragonflame Train two characters up to max effectiveness with an Incursus. Now give one of those characters another 70 million SP. Both characters are now flying an Incursus at 100 %, but the higher SP character's risk when he undocks his incursus is now arbitrarily a couple dozen/hundred times the first character's. Arbitrary punishment for training is not good design. one is stuck flying an incursis, the other can say lol he is flying an incursis and undock a vexor. or damn near any other subcap in game. Irrelevant, we're not arguing whether SP are useful here. In said specific situation, the higher SP character is being arbitrarily punished. That is -all- that matters. No. You choose to continue training skills in order to fly a wide range of ships effectively. If you told me I could fly an incursis and replace my pods cheaply or fly a ton of different ships at the cost of more expensive clones I would (and do) choose to continue training SP. There is nothing arbitrary here, it's a simple concept. The more you train, the more ship you can fly with better results at the cost of paying more to replace clones. You are given total freedom what to train and how far to train it. If you don't like the decisions you made then make better ones in the future rather than ***** about it.
ABITA Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2010.03.18 23:36:00 - [196] When you have to use 71 million isk clone, wich is costing 13 million isk, you dont want to fly small ships anymore. 90+ million sp, you better of in capital ships.
adriaans Amarr Ankaa. Nair Al-Zaurak	Posted - 2010.03.18 23:43:00 - [197] Originally by: Sargon I /shrug it's just a matter of how much ccp wants to promote 0.0 And to the guy saying, 'anyone who can't make 30m an hour is just fail' lololol. Maybe I can, maybe I can't. Either way, I'm not going to grind isk for 90 minutes just because I got stuck in a bubble, where it requires absolutely no skill/twitch reflex to pod someone. And that 90 minutes is before I even start covering the cost of the ship I lost, which ofc is fair play. Simply allowing pods to warp out of bubbles with nontargeted warp jamming invulnerability like t3s would solve any reasonable complaint about this and would make the debate over clone costs moot. If you can't be bubbled in a pod and still get podded, well then you deserve to shell out for the expensive clone. In fact, this idea is so awesome I would actually go back to 0.0. Until then, my expensive, yet implantless, clone and I will stay in lowsec, the real endgame, thanks. Would deffo make me fly a lot more in 0.0
Amanda Mor Gallente	Posted - 2010.03.18 23:59:00 - [198] Originally by: Great Artista Clone costs is CCP's way of saying that the "End game" isn't 0.0, but lowsec. You just blew my mind...
Foraven Gallente	Posted - 2010.03.19 00:10:00 - [199] Originally by: DigitalCommunist I would have three additional metrics added to clones, beyond skillpoint coverage. I think it would be a nice tradeof. Either chose a cheaper clone that take more time to get online, or a more expensive one that you can use right away. There you could chose between losing more isk or more of your time. I think many people would find waiting to be the worst punishment of the two.
Gorefacer Caldari Resurrection Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2010.03.19 00:12:00 - [200] Originally by: b1zz I see no choice there Ephemeron. You've stated three 'choices' that are the same: old toon, you are forbidden from progressing beyond this point. What you're really saying is that you want older toons to be brought back to younger toons. He's not saying that at all. He's just pointing out that they have that option. Those are choices, just not ones that you may like. Progression in EVE can mean many things. Halting SP training doesn't mean progression stops. I'm a lazy man and absolutely refuse to wait 24hrs for jump clone timers. I realized this and have played the game sans implants as a personal choice. Many others that started the game at the same time as me now have 10-15m more SP than I have due to my own choosing. If at some point I decide the penalty of more SP outweighs the benefit I will slow down training, stop it, or lose SP in a high ranked lvl 5 skill to make room for training something else. I'm happy with where I'm at in the game because I orchestrated where I am and how I got there. If I make or have made a choice that limits my ability in some respect to the game I'll do different later or try to fix it, not blame CCP. I understood the rules they set and acted accordingly, it's not their fault if others race to high SP just to rue their decision. The potential consequences were laid out for them not long after they started playing. These individuals have had years to intentionally screw themselves and now they have only themselves to blame. This of course means they'd have to take responsibility for their actions rather than ask for the game to change. EVE is a game where you can't always have your cake and eat it too. This irritates some people, others appreciate it.
Pr1ncess Alia Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2010.03.19 07:07:00 - [201] Originally by: Gorefacer it's not their fault if others race to high SP just to rue their decision. The potential consequences were laid out for them not long after they started playing. These individuals have had years to intentionally screw themselves and now they have only themselves to blame. This of course means they'd have to take responsibility for their actions rather than ask for the game to change. EVE is a game where you can't always have your cake and eat it too. This irritates some people, others appreciate it. you heard it here first. keeping your account active and training skills is intentionally screwing yourself. and you should have ****ing seen it coming. jesus henry christmas, take some responsibility ppl, really. ppl like the OP need to stop crying.
b1zz	Posted - 2010.03.19 07:18:00 - [202] ^^ Stopping training is not a choice. It would not be acceptable at any time, 6 months in, a year in, or 10 years in. It might be barely acceptable if we had perfect knowledge of what aspect of the game we were going to enjoy the most before we started, but we do not.
Jin Nib Resplendent Knives	Posted - 2010.03.19 07:22:00 - [203] Originally by: b1zz ^^ Stopping training is not a choice. It would not be acceptable at any time, 6 months in, a year in, or 10 years in. It might be barely acceptable if we had perfect knowledge of what aspect of the game we were going to enjoy the most before we started, but we do not. There are three char slots per account, you don't have to dual box everything...
Gorefacer Caldari Resurrection Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2010.03.19 07:33:00 - [204] Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia Originally by: Gorefacer it's not their fault if others race to high SP just to rue their decision. The potential consequences were laid out for them not long after they started playing. These individuals have had years to intentionally screw themselves and now they have only themselves to blame. This of course means they'd have to take responsibility for their actions rather than ask for the game to change. EVE is a game where you can't always have your cake and eat it too. This irritates some people, others appreciate it. you heard it here first. keeping your account active and training skills is intentionally screwing yourself. and you should have ****ing seen it coming. jesus henry christmas, take some responsibility ppl, really. ppl like the OP need to stop crying. Its only screwing yourself if after training that far you decide you can't afford your pods anymore and because of this your gameplay suffers. I'd be willing to bet most high SP players are perfectly happy with their choice to continue training SP. Sorry your mad about this mechanic but it seems perfectly reasonable to me. If they tweaked the prices a bit it wouldn't be the end of the world but then again neither is paying up 20m or whatever it is after playing the game so long and getting all the benefits that come with all those SP you've acquired. It was others making it sound like their high SP characters were screwing them.
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.03.19 08:31:00 - [205] Originally by: b1zz I see no choice there Ephemeron. You've stated three 'choices' that are the same: old toon, you are forbidden from progressing beyond this point. What you're really saying is that you want older toons to be brought back to younger toons. The old toon isn't "forbidden". Using that word is dishonest. The player just has to make a choice about whether to accept the risk. Oh boo hoo you can't have all of the good and none of the bad? God damb, that's so sad! You might just as well say that players are "forbidden" from flying T2 ships or using faction modules because they're expensive.
Benri Konpaku	Posted - 2010.03.19 08:48:00 - [206] Edited by: Benri Konpaku on 19/03/2010 08:49:55 Hi, it's me Benri K. Posting in a doomed thread again. If anyone is at a point where new clones hurt their wallet like that then they need to step back and work on learning how to earn isk first. But then again, just like watching noobs rushing to get that cool ship (heh)only to lose it right away, (heheh) and then emorage quitting because they (heheheh) just wont be able to afford a new one for another month (hahahahaha) it's just... too much fun to see. AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ehem Sorry, my point was that there's a time for everything and EVE is not a game for the impatient and/or for people without a plan. Having a super high SP char is a luxury with a hefty price tag, just the same way level 5 can be very costly time-wise when compared to the 4 levels prior. That's how EVE is designed, the option to go beyond is there but it WILL cost you. And it's up to you to think about it and decide if you are willing to pay the price or move on to the next char/skill. tl;dr Shut up, grow up and HTFU. And Cat is probably going to sue me for copyright infringement.
Bloodwolf M.A.R.S. Enterprises	Posted - 2010.03.19 11:58:00 - [207] The problem is not the cost of the clones per se.. but how the pressure is applied on older players. There were some ideas like allowing us to buy licenses for clones for a higher cost. And getting replacement clones for free ... Everyone who is not seeing the problem is thinking that the veterans are upset with paying more. This might be one point but the truly restricting factor is that you can not justify flying smaller ships once you have to dish out 30 or 60m for every clone. This is not about whether you can afford a better ship or not.. some people just enjoy flying different stuff from time to time. Using an alt is more of a way of circumventing some design flaw. This is not dumbing down anything... if anything from my point of view you could make the cost of death even higher.. but you should not do it in a way that restricts options of gameplay. It is funny how people with less skill points seem to be offended by the possible reduction of clone costs. This seems to be rooted in the still lingering superstition that high sp means a meaningful advantage on the battlefield. In fact the clone cost does not hurt the older players... it hurts gameplay most. Do you want someone to risk a disposable ship in pvp? Or do you want him to retreat at the next best opportunity? Well in the end those changes will take place.. imagine the future.. some years from now.. half of the active player base reaches the point where they have to spend 60m for one clone. What do you think will happen to the market price and usage of smaller ships?
Sturmwolke	Posted - 2010.03.19 12:19:00 - [208] Originally by: Bloodwolf Everyone who is not seeing the problem is thinking that the veterans are upset with paying more... ... you should not do it in a way that restricts options of gameplay. Dude ... * I can't justify the cost of losing ships, therefore I don't PVP (much). There goes some of my options for ship killing fun. * I can't justify the risk and amount work of running a lowsec/0.0 POS. There goes some of my options to get rich. * I can't justify joining any 0.0 alliance because of RL time commitments. There goes some of my options to experience 0.0 gameplay. * I can't justify ... ad nauseum. Interesting spin, but ultimately, you're the one that's not seeing things in the proper perspective.
meat vapour	Posted - 2010.03.19 12:28:00 - [209] wild guess here - this topic was started by someone who bought their way into the high sp character market and therefore has no clue how to make the money to afford the clone? or... people are just scraping the barrel, inventing things to rage about? either way, crying about clone costs; just lol.
Ji Sama Caldari Tash-Murkon Prime Industries United Corporations Of Modern Eve	Posted - 2010.03.19 12:50:00 - [210] Pvp'ers are the biggest crybabies around.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.