Didn't have to spend 2 years on training his char.

Ok the 16 mil sp character that someone bought doesn't have an advantage over another 16 mil sp character, but the week old player that bought a 16 mil sp character with RL money spent on plex does have an advantage over the week old character that didn't buy his character. It may not be PTW but its using out of games means to gain in game advantage. Call it what you will. I think of it as a cheat.

Oh god...

Yea, you could counter like that if you blindly assume that the char-buyer doesn't have that experience. Maybe he does. Maybe he had 2 years of time on studying how to play with that char instead of grinding missions, mining, exploration, trade, whatever mind-numbing activity it is that the other guy has been doing in the meanwhile.

Eve Online: Where people will tell you that saving 2 years of your life isn't an advantage.

I will now sum up this thread.

One side feels that P2W means any advantage that can be gained through RL money (that is an in game advantage).

The other side feels that P2W only applies to purchasable advantages that can only be purchased via RL money.



Neither side will agree on whether EVE is P2W because they disagree on the definition of the term.

And unfortunately, neither side is right (or wrong I guess), as there is no hard and fast definition of the term.

And so we will go around this circle until someone gives up.




Now, where individuals are wrong is that they think someone is stupid, or foolish, or somesuch for using either definition. Because the definitions are just opinions.

For the RL solo player, alts are a need, since every other solo player uses them. He is at a disadvantage if he chooses not to, and does not have the same ingame options available (since he's solo and does not want/does not have access ingame friends). Such options however be made available, such as "traffic info for Empire gates, Interbus hauling, black market haulers shopping for you in Empire". To provide such convenience amongst others would lessen the need for alts, which would lessen revenue for CCP. Hence the problem some of us have with them, and the argument that they're P2W.

It's not the case of a solo, roleplayer, or technically challenged player vs. a corp, the convenience it offers (and which it should be the only entity to offer, btw) and the evidence that a RL single person will always be less powerful than several RL persons. it's the case of a solo player vs another solo player, the latter choosing or being able to use alts.: the former is clearly at a disadvantage, since he's out of options to offset the added value of alts, which are linked to RL money in one form of another.

Alts are encouraged by gameplay as it is, and since they bring in revenue, some cynics argue that they are really P2W.

You could have read what I've already linked a dozen times and saved yourself the pain of having the moves like tippia. Some people cannot use alts and have no access to help from other players etc

Your scenario addresses people who all use alts. This is not what I'm talking about, I'm talking about what kind of options to level the playfield are there available for solo players who cannot use alts, to put them on the same level of efficiency as solo players who do use them? Solo, as in solo, no friends or corpmates.

He is at a very slight and easily dismissable in any MMO. Most of them are also designed to accommodate this scrubby and pubbie portion of the playerbase that would rather be single amongst others, while enjoying distant interaction with said others.

He's absolutely boned in EvE. Unless he invests in alts!

"The Power of 2 special offer is back! From now until Sunday, July 22, 2012, you will be able to create a new account with 180 days of game time for the low price of -ú34.99 or 3 PLEX.

Having that extra pilot at your disposal can often turn the tides on a difficult mission or shift a taxing task into a more efficient venture. A second account also means more places you can be at once, which makes monitoring the markets easier, gathering intel faster, and mining ops more productive"

But what if his playstyle does not agree with that? what if he is technically challenged? what if he's casual scum, and cannot reliably fund them through isk?


I, for one, don't mind that such scrubs are at a disadvantage. You seem to resent that however, since you vehemently try to uphold that they aren't.

Advocating such fixes would require that the public opinion acknowledges that there is indeed a problem with certain tasks being all too conveniently fulfilled by alts, or only realistically assignable to them only. As of now, the vocal majority of this here place deems there is none, while the evidence leads to think that there indeed is.

And nobody would need hard data to state that the ratio of alts per player must be laughably low in any MMO compared to EvE, since in EvE they are pretty much mandatory and require low to zero ingame maintenance to perform tasks that realistically can only be assigned to them.

But this program is really not called invite a friend, is it? It's called the Power of Two, and let's read -yet again-, what it says:

"The Power of 2 special offer is back! From now until Sunday, July 22, 2012, you will be able to create a new account with 180 days of game time for the low price of -ú34.99 or 3 PLEX.

Having that extra pilot at your disposal can often turn the tides on a difficult mission or shift a taxing task into a more efficient venture. A second account also means more places you can be at once, which makes monitoring the markets easier, gathering intel faster, and mining ops more productive."

- You seem to think I want alts removed altogether. While this would be awesome, it's not happening. However, there could be ingame options for the player who does not want to use them, and who wishes to play somewhat solo, to do menial stuff that is dumped on semi, or completely afk, alts. This has a lot to do with intel, for example, since solo flying without a scouting alt is not really realistic, is it now? For other examples, read this.
- Reading it again might also open your eyes on the fact that in no way do I wish the effectiveness of corps reduced, nor that of a single player through the use of alts. I merely wish that ingame options for the single alt-less solo player were implemented, that could allow him the same access to convenience that a single alt-funding solo player has, without having to ask assistance from other people -just like the alt-funding player, who can do everything on its own-.

Until such options are implemented, alts are really P2W, because the options they provide are not accessible to said solo alt-less player -who will not or cannot use them, such as explained in the link above-.

Can you even process what you read -if you've read it at all-? How can you create such assumptions?

Seriously? read the linked post, seriously.

But, Courage Wolf, I'm not lobbying for the efficiency of other entities to be diminished -though the fact that a single player can achieve on its own corp efficiency is probably a bit disturbing-, only for the efficiency of the solo, alt-less player, to be enhanced. If more power to other entities, no problem. But at this very moment, in EvE, alts are mandatory, and that is quite a huge problem.

All the player-driven services you give as examples are only available if, well, they're available, and it must be assumed that sometimes they are not, giving the alt-funding player an edge that cannot be acquired through ingame means for the alt-less player -which was the crux of the derping for the people discussing P2W-.

The clear advantage is that when no other people are here, or willing, to do your bidding, the alt-funding player has access to options the alt-less player has not access to.

This is why most people invest in them. For almost complete freedom of action.

Why don't you go back to page 25? I'm not comparing alt vs alt, but alt-funding single player vs. alt-less single player

So you mean that not choosing to invest in alts is a choice comparable to flying solo ingame?
You state that not having alts is an ingame choice, comparable to not fitting a warp core stabilizer?

Because that's the only way they can get an even playfield with another solo player, who is himself funding alts.

Or do you mean that it's only normal that an alt-less solo player is at a disadvantage vs. an alt-funding solo player?

The solo player is at a disadvantage against 3 friends, but you are ok with this? Is this P2W? or should Combat be alway 1v1?

It is beyond me that you actually think MMO's should be only for solo players.

That is quite wrong: alts are used in such a way that they provide the less micro-requiring and yet most efficient advantage. People playing a character do not want to sit idle at a tower or safe boosting a gang, orbiting a gate cloaked for hours on end, or spending their time hauling in Empire (not all their time anyway). Alts provide an undue advantage, since no living player would accept to spend all its playtime performing those very necessary yet very boring tasks.
Tasks which cannot be done through other ingame means, therefore putting players not using alts, at a disadvantage.

But if you really do equate alts with other living players, comparing advantages gained through metagame, to absolutely standard ingame playing and bond-forming, let's just say you're blatantly dishonest. Just like Tippia, but much less verbose, sad and tiresome as he is however. It's a breath of fresh air.

Tasks which cannot be done through other ingame means, therefore putting players not using alts, at a disadvantage.

Except alts and friends are quite different from one another. Let me put it this way ... if the game were designed such that alts did not provide a significant advantage (for whatever reason ... say actually playing the game was too intensive for even the best of players to possibly manage more than one ship at a time, such that trying to divide your attention between two ships was actually less effective than flying one ship well ... it could really be any method, but that one is off the top of my head) and yet having friends who would also be pushing themselves to the limit to only manage one ship each was still just as much an advantage as it is today, does liking friends and disliking alts still make no sense?

In an ideal EVE, alts would not be a means of gaining an advantage. Friends, of course, still would be.

This is untrue. Anyone can have alts. Your friends can have alts. You can play by yourself with alts. Numbers of people are irrelevant here, while numbers of characters are what matters. The fact remains that alts give advantages whether you're solo or already in a corp full of people who also have many alts each. The fact also remains that all alts are paid for with real money. This is about as cut-and-dry as pay-to-win gets, short of an in-game item shop full of gold ammo.

The real kicker is that we all pay a subscription fee (or multiple subscription fees, in the cases of people who sell PLEXes and those who fund their alts out of their own bank accounts) on top of pay-to-win game mechanics.

How is convenience not an advantage? How is having a second character that will do my bidding no ifs, ands, or buts about it not an advantage over a friend with a mind of his own? In some scenarios, like watching gates, alts are superior to friends. They simply are not the same thing by any stretch of the imagination and should not be treated as such.

And even if they were identical to friends, they are friends that you can generate by giving real money to CCP. Which is still an advantage that you get by paying real money. Which is pretty much what paying to win is.

PLEX comes from giving real money to CCP. Every time. Alts are paid for by real money, whether you're doing the paying or whether you're giving someone ISK to do the paying for you. Someone is paying CCP real money, and really two people are getting an advantage. The first is getting the advantage of more ISK for something which he did not earn in game. The second is getting the advantage of continuing to play even though he did not pay. It's this system that is what makes PLEX barely tolerable, even though it is a gross form of pay to win, it does have its merits. Like allowing more people to play ... oh wait ... I see where this is going. Free to play. It's basically the same thing, only more blatant and extreme about it.

Wall of irrevelant text

But they aren't MMOs. I enjoy flying in space amongst others, and witness their hilarious chatter and zany antics.

Also, how much fun would you have to group up with two other players, and go bust a single player controlling two other alts? I wouldn't have any.

Now, if I want to go against him while not asking for help from friends, because it would feel lame, I have no options but to get alts myself, I'm kinda forced into it.

Circumventing a huge portion of the game with the use of real life cash is negative for the game... You don't need to have a means of funding yourself in game so long as you have rl cash you're willing to spend on isk. This is the issue and this is why this game is no longer a sandbox... You can take out of game assets and use them to gain an in game advantage.

Furthermore, ccp has stated many many many many many times that RMT was bad for the game and this is one of the "reasons" why they have taken more serious measures towards culling this "black market". CCP is doing exactly what they have determined is negative for the play of the game and hiding behind a clever guise known as PLEX.


If you played the game before and after the implementation of plex the change is obviously apparent.