|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 24 post(s) |
Othran
Brutor tribe
   |
Posted - 2010.11.25 12:55:00 -
[1]
In general its a positive move and long overdue.
I haven't done the numbers yet but I have a gut feeling that if you've maxed out a single attribute (through remapping) for a specific training plan then you're going to be training slower. If my gut feeling is right then you might want to consider either a free remap or a remap on petition.
That's about the only criticism I have.
|
Othran
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.11.25 13:20:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: Xodarapmis
I feel like I've wasted 3 weeks worth of missions with nothing much to show for it. My initial time that came with the game is almost up and I'm now reconsidering whether to subscribe.
I realise that you don't want to inject 1.6? 16? Trillion ISK into the economy and that it is difficult to draw a line if you reimburse some but not others. But for those of us where it represents such an enormous percentage of earnings to date, I would ask you to consider an equitible solution.
I think this is a valid concern. Advanced learning skills represent a huge expense to genuinely new characters which they could better use on ships and equipment.
Some latitude should be allowed here - eg allow refund of isk costs to players under 2 months old who have advanced learning skills injected. They haven't had the benefit of them in any way.
On the flipside you're going to get the double-speed training and get the skillpoints refunded.
|
Othran
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.11.25 13:31:00 -
[3]
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
On the flipside, I'm guessing you feel somewhat cheated out of the money, because if you'd known this earlier, you would have the same advantages in a month's time without having spent the money for it. That does kinda suck, and we're sorry that's happened to a few people.
On the basis that the change is being made to encourage new players then I think you could come up with something a bit more positive than that.
When I restarted Eve (played 2003-2005) it still took me 3 weeks of missioning to raise the required amount for all advanced implants while buying ships etc. This was before tutorial/epic arc stuff but even so I was a returning player who knew most of the basics.
The people that you're "sorry that's happened to" are the people least well equipped to cope in isk terms. They are also your potential future subscribers.
Go think again about this and come up with a plan to make these "few people" happy. Its a one-off and I'm sure you can identify accounts that aren't buddied/power-of-two etc.
Really you need to do this.
|
Othran
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.11.25 14:31:00 -
[4]
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Again, I take the point that the ISK is most significant to newer players, but if they've already spent the money then they're already coping. It would be better for them to get it back, sure, but they're not in a worse position after the change. That's where we're coming from here - nobody is worse off in absolute terms.
Yes I recognise that they are better off in the long term.
That's not what motivates NEW players though and if they've just spent the equivalent of a couple of fitted cruisers on adv learning then they're not going to be happy bunnies.
Its a small group, why not just deal with it in a newbie-friendly way? For example your beancounters could run a script which removes multiple accounts with the same CC registered to it from the process with no problems at all. Then run a script checking on buddy subbies/power-of-two and remove them. Run script on account age under 2 months - beancounters check will do that. Credit everyone remaining with 25mill. Job done. Obviously active subs only.
See I still just about remember what its like to start this game. You spend the 25mill on adv learning in the expectation that it pays you back over the year in reduced training time. While you do that you struggle to pay for anything else.
You're really sort of slapping the newbies that had read up and learned with this one but meh its your revenue stream 
|
Othran
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.11.25 15:04:00 -
[5]
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Ultimately, we didn't do anything like this because we were on a tight schedule and we determined that it added more risk than benefit. That's what it came down to on a lot of these edge decisions.
Oh I do understand. Its simply a cost analysis of what works for the majority.
Your problem here is that the people affected are people who are not even medium-term subscribers. They may even be boxed-version customers. ie no sub signed up to.
I'd suggest you have a chat next time you sit down with the GMs and brief them to have a bit of leeway. The changes are superb for a new character, but not so great for one created in the last 4 weeks.
NB - for anyone wondering, none of my characters/accounts would be eligible.
No reply required Greyscale, thread is long enough.
|
Othran
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.11.25 15:10:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Cresalle
Quote:
Also, recycling alts is against the rules and will get you banned.
What constitutes 'recycling alts' and where is this rule stated?
Seriously, is there a list of these bizzare rules somewhere? I keep hearing people mention things but how the hell am I supposed to know what's hearsay and what's a real rule?
Someone hits you with the banstick.
Alternatively you could use your brain and realise that using an alt to gank people until said alt goes below -5 and then deleting him/her isn't fair. Not only is it not fair, its just pointless nonsense. Whats the point in another mind-numbingly boring gank?
I suspect you're not the type who understands that.
|
|
|
| |
|