Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
thatguyinpc
|
Posted - 2006.07.21 18:12:00 -
[1]
Hi gang,
IĘve only been following the forums for a few months now (mostly crime and punishment) so if this is a dead horse please forgive me and point me in the direction of some past threads. (In my defense I did browse a few pages back to see if I could find something similar and found nothing).
Considering that some of these threads that have proposed radical changes such as removing local chat etc I thought IĘd throw out an idea of my own.
It occurred to me that since I have spent the large majority of my eve career thus far training the learning and industrial skills that IĘm way behind the curve of someone that decided to be a pirate etc right off the bat. In PVP I get squashed pretty easily, especially if IĘm out mining.
That got me to thinking since my skills at the present time are economy based, why shouldnĘt I get to use that to my advantage?
Give us carebear / industrialists some force in EVE, that of the economic sanction!
What I propose is a way to price the goods that IĘm selling by standings. After all why should I sell a ship that IĘve just built to someone that has previously killed me for the same price that I do to someone that has helped me, or at least left me alone.
Now the big hole that I see with this is the argument: bah that can easily be bypassed by using an alt. True, but in the same respect that when I travel I have to use a scout or take a chance, someone that I donĘt want to sell to, or at least want more money out of due to their actions should have to go through the trouble of using that alt, or if in a hurry pay my higher price.
There is also the adding of serial numbers to items. Now that could get really interesting. Say I sell ship type (insert type here) with serial # (insert serial # here) to player A but it ends up in the hands of player B (who is a pirate that made my barge/hauler go squish) while I couldnĘt prove heĘs an alt, I could at least suspect that they are in cahoots and if I so decide then change my standings towards player A. At the very least it could add intrigue and a new level of depth to the game, as well as a new twist on spying in trying to figure out whoĘs alt is who.
Now obviously I donĘt expect pirates to embrace my revolutionary idea, but how do you other carebare / industrialist feel about it?
I havenĘt had a whole lot of time to think this through so anyone else seeing glaring holes in my idea that would like to offer some constructive criticism, please post them, so we can try and come up with a reasonable solution.
Guy
|
Bean Doodle
Wasteland Industries Chimaera Pact
|
Posted - 2006.07.21 18:19:00 -
[2]
/aye!!
Woohootles |
Tabet Saens
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2006.07.21 18:32:00 -
[3]
Interesting idea. Might even create a pseudo-profession, middleman or somesuch, where a person buys certain ships only to sell it to pirates who have been "too" successful.
|
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2006.07.21 18:36:00 -
[4]
The problem with your suggestions (I know em cause I've made suggestions like that and got an answer as to what kept CCP from going that way) is twofold.
Firstly, the trading-by-standing thing. The amount of stnadings corps can set is limited for a reason. Every standing takes database space, every calculation that is affected by standings and has more then one party influencing it will require extra resources. Stick one hundred thousand people trading via one central market with each of them with a unique set of standings towards the others and you get an incredible amount of calculations.
The same obviously goes for serial numbers. Stacked items only use one 'record' if you will. Serial numbers would make every single item unique and thus not stackable in that regard.
Secondly, CCP as recently as about 3-4 months ago were worried about the EVe market not being able to digest the lower amounts of good availability caused by making standings affect prices and availability on an individual basis or even corp basis. ve markets rely on large amounts of identical goods to be filled to the neccesary levels. Add standings as a factor and only part of what is now open to purchase to you will be open to purchase after, reducing the amount of trade between unrelated parties.
I'd love more direct forms of economical warfare too. But it seems there's some problems with that. In the mean while, don't underestimate the amounts of economical warfare going on unseen by most Alliances use more then guns to fight one another for example.
Old blog |
Jenny Spitfire
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.07.21 19:10:00 -
[5]
Carebears have powers. They make HACs and T2 prices out of PvP reach. ---------------- RecruitMe@NOINT!
|
Isip
|
Posted - 2006.07.21 19:11:00 -
[6]
The other big problem is Alt's. Unless you want to make it hard for all new players to get stuff by the market, all anyone would need to do is create an alt do to their shopping. The market is anonymous and will likely stay that way.
In the mean time you can use escrow to restrict your sales to corp members. I don't know for sure what is coming with Kali contracts, but I would not be suprised to see that expanded to aliance members. Any looser restrictions would fail to prevent sales to your enemies because of alts.
|
thatguyinpc
|
Posted - 2006.07.21 19:27:00 -
[7]
Rod,
Thank you for your insightful comments. Please keep in mind that anything more complicated than point and click and IĘm lost.
I see your point about the serial numbers so I suppose that is out without a major overhaul.
I do find it hard to believe that a standings price couldnĘt be brought in to the game, even if it was overly simplified into only 4 categories of Positive standing price, neutral, negative, and No Sale.
If anyone who knows anything about programming can jump in here that would be great.
Isip,
I specifically addressed the issue of alts, while I understand that they can circumvent the negative price issue it is still an inconvenience, just like when others have to scout a gate before a jumpą.
Guy
|
Durindana
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.07.21 19:28:00 -
[8]
Inability to discriminate against buyers/sellers by identity is imho EvE's biggest drawback.
|
thatguyinpc
|
Posted - 2006.07.21 19:37:00 -
[9]
Edited by: thatguyinpc on 21/07/2006 19:39:40
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Carebears have powers. They make HACs and T2 prices out of PvP reach.
Jenny,
ThatĘs really not accurate. To date I donĘt have any T2 BPOs. Which means I have to work really hard for my money. However that doesnĘt mean that I shouldnĘt be able to force my will on those I oppose, just in a different manner than those who force their will on me (normally by forcing me into a new clone).
I have seen many players (especially pirates) who claim that punishment should be dealt out by the players, not NPCs. Especially if industrialists start sharing information on black lists etc, wouldnĘt this be an avenue to move in that direction?
Guy
Edit per spelling
|
LUGAL MOP'N'GLO
|
Posted - 2006.07.21 20:22:00 -
[10]
The best walkaround for now is to setup a chat channel where you can advertise your goods to friends. That way they get the first shot at buying them. It will not only build your capital, but you will begin to have loyal customers that will keep coming back. If you're producing things that a group of people might need on a weekly or monthly basis, make a relationship with them and contract it.
I like your idea its very creative.
|
|
Frezik
Celtic Anarchy
|
Posted - 2006.07.21 21:29:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Rod Blaine The same obviously goes for serial numbers. Stacked items only use one 'record' if you will. Serial numbers would make every single item unique and thus not stackable in that regard.
Yes, many MMOs that have every item being unique end up with major database processing issues. They also tend to implement ways to limit how many items a given player can have, and they still end up with problems. Where CCP rarely removes old characters, many MMOs are forced to stick to 6-12 month character wiping policies, because they just can't afford the space.
I'm curious if CCP has a clever way around this for implementing Tech 3, which is supposed to be about customization. ---- "Well in this case, he's being flamed, and rightly so, for whinning about a game mechanic that doesn't actually exist." -Lorth |
thatguyinpc
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 08:26:00 -
[12]
I haven't seen anything about Tech III, could you point me in that direction? It would be great if the serial number concept could be put back on the table.
Guy
|
Eilene Fernite
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 08:36:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Durindana Inability to discriminate against buyers/sellers by identity is imho EvE's biggest drawback.
There is no such inability. If you don't want to sell to just anybody, then don't. Unless ofcourse you want effortless sales, then you go the open market with your goods, where everyone can buy them.
|
Michiyo Daishi
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 08:37:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Carebears have powers. They make HACs and T2 prices out of PvP reach.
While Jenny's answer is actually humurous, it does bring about the aformentioned "power" of industralists controlling the market.
Similar to certain cartel's dealing and wheeling to make it seem, to the untrained eye, that due to the loss of say, resource x, price y increases tenfold, and nobody can do anything about it.
Whilst in reality, said cartel actually stockpiled resource x and kept it off the market, making it seem legitmately a good reason to increase price y.
Now, take EVE's market into play.
People say that due to the huge demand for HAC's, prices skyrocketed. Simple case of supply and demand? Sure you can say that, but what if...
What if the HAC makers out ther are actually stockpiling said HAC's for their own corp/alliance/group of merchants/industrialists to bleed the market dry (which in EVE's case, will bleed for far longer than a person can go without blood for for sure) and earn as much ISK as possible in the process?
Think about it, we dont need to give the industrialists any more power as it stands. They simply have too much power to begin with! -
*posts posted are not official statements of EVEnews.com, and are the poster's own* |
Malachon Draco
eXceed Inc. Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 08:42:00 -
[15]
One thing needs to be added IMO, the ability to close off markets in outposts to people with negative/neutral standings.
Why would an enemy ship who isn't allowed to dock at a station, still be allowed to buy goods off the market there?
It would also prevent some of the escrow/mission scams, where things are being offered to be picked up or delivered in a 0.0 station where most players would never be able to dock due to standings.
Shouldn't be hard to implement I'd think, just like the system checks whether you can dock somewhere based on standings, it could check when setting escrows/using markets for the same thing.
|
thatguyinpc
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 09:15:00 -
[16]
Michiyo,
I fail to see the merit in your argument. In the same respect that I can at some point train my combat skill set to match a PVPers skills, the PVPer can train their industry skills to offset the costs involved with ships and equipment if they so choose.
Guy
|
McTaggart
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 11:07:00 -
[17]
Don't the trade skills only help if you're selling?
|
Wanoah
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 11:24:00 -
[18]
You can limit who you sell your products to in certain respects. If you control a station or outpost in 0.0, you can limit who has docking rights, and by extension, who can buy stuff at that station.
Of course, that's pretty limited as most trading happens in Empire, but it shows you how much more fun and varied gameplay can be if you're prepared to make things happen out in the badlands. I sometimes wish that all of Eve was 0.0... |
Miss Overlord
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 11:30:00 -
[19]
there are indirect ways to engage economic warfare at the moment (ie escrow reselling or sniping markets out ) that said its generally indirect and the only game is to take a bigger more rapid ISK generating process.
|
Lacero Callrisian
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 19:09:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Wanoah You can limit who you sell your products to in certain respects. If you control a station or outpost in 0.0, you can limit who has docking rights, and by extension, who can buy stuff at that station.
I'm afraid you can't, you can limit who can collect their goods if they buy them but you can't stop them being bought.
This is a huge problem I really wish CCP would fix, the markets in 0.0 are essentially useless because enemies can fly in and buy everything, then resell it at twice the price. There's no way to have a 100% functioning market in 0.0 due to this.
THUS IS THE SHAME OF CCP |
|
MrTripps
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 19:46:00 -
[21]
Quote: Say I sell ship type (insert type here) with serial # (insert serial # here) to player A but it ends up in the hands of player B (who is a pirate that made my barge/hauler go squish) while I couldnĘt prove heĘs an alt, I could at least suspect that they are in cahoots
No more then you are in cahoots with players A. He could have just sold it to player B.
Do you, by chance, work for Sony?
"Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right!" - Salvor Hardin |
thatguyinpc
|
Posted - 2006.07.27 12:51:00 -
[22]
Originally by: MrTripps
Quote: Say I sell ship type (insert type here) with serial # (insert serial # here) to player A but it ends up in the hands of player B (who is a pirate that made my barge/hauler go squish) while I couldnĘt prove heĘs an alt, I could at least suspect that they are in cahoots
No more then you are in cahoots with players A. He could have just sold it to player B.
Do you, by chance, work for Sony?
Discretion would be required in the suspecting of alts scenerio, otherwise you very soon won't be selling to anyone. However, someone carefull enough could watch for trends.
Nope don't work for sony, and don't understand the refrence.
Guy
|
Naqq
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2006.07.27 13:39:00 -
[23]
Love the idea, with a touch of CCP it could be really class imo -- "Yarrr..." [FRIG] promotional video|Training film #1|Training film #2| |Newsreels: #1,#2,#3(NEW).| |
Izo Azlion
Veto.
|
Posted - 2006.07.27 14:13:00 -
[24]
What strikes me here is that alot of carebears dont like Pirates, and frankly, I'm here to provide for myself and have fun doing it.
I dont want people to say "Because your a Pirate, you have to pay 15% more than playerX who is a close friend and carebear"
I'm not too keen but it'd need some work to give you a final answer.
Izo Azlion.
--- Veto.
|
Jenny Spitfire
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.07.27 14:16:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Malachon Draco One thing needs to be added IMO, the ability to close off markets in outposts to people with negative/neutral standings.
Why would an enemy ship who isn't allowed to dock at a station, still be allowed to buy goods off the market there?
It would also prevent some of the escrow/mission scams, where things are being offered to be picked up or delivered in a 0.0 station where most players would never be able to dock due to standings.
Shouldn't be hard to implement I'd think, just like the system checks whether you can dock somewhere based on standings, it could check when setting escrows/using markets for the same thing.
Not possible to program. Too laggy.
Waste of time to program because of alts.
Doesnt work in empire because the common buyers/sellers are actually players in noobcorps.
Standings based market can only be done at player stations in 0.0. ---------------- RecruitMe@NOINT!
|
Jenny Spitfire
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.07.27 14:24:00 -
[26]
Originally by: thatguyinpc Edited by: thatguyinpc on 21/07/2006 19:39:40
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Carebears have powers. They make HACs and T2 prices out of PvP reach.
Jenny,
ThatĘs really not accurate. To date I donĘt have any T2 BPOs. Which means I have to work really hard for my money. However that doesnĘt mean that I shouldnĘt be able to force my will on those I oppose, just in a different manner than those who force their will on me (normally by forcing me into a new clone).
I have seen many players (especially pirates) who claim that punishment should be dealt out by the players, not NPCs. Especially if industrialists start sharing information on black lists etc, wouldnĘt this be an avenue to move in that direction?
Guy
Edit per spelling
TBH you dont need T2 BPOs. T2 BPCs or buy/sell T2 mods/ships are enough to give PvPers/pirates grief. Dont have a wide portfolio. Have a narrow and specialised portfolio and you can control prices until traders start sending you hatemails. ---------------- RecruitMe@NOINT!
|
Kadrush
|
Posted - 2006.07.27 15:50:00 -
[27]
I am completely against, set buy and sell order are already a real pain, if you want to set like 40 order in one day, you need to set time and price (for sell orders) and time, range and price (for buy orders).
The game did not allow us to set our own range and time standard so in every single order we need to set a new time and range. Therefore creating 40 orders for traders take around 30 minutes and a lot some pain in the fist due to keyboard overuse.
Now if you also need to set standings in every single order I am going to stop trading for sure, but if the game changes to allow us to set our own standards for trading orders, than I agree with you guys.
|
Lala Ru
|
Posted - 2006.07.27 17:21:00 -
[28]
If standings are too much of a pain, how about a universal blacklist instead. People on the blacklist are simply prevented from buying any of your goods.
|
Terrak2
The Black Fleet
|
Posted - 2006.07.27 17:40:00 -
[29]
I already use an alt to get items from empire space, this would change nothing. Stop wasting the devs' time.
Besides, all the pirates would sue you for discrimination and you'd be broke anyway.
|
Malthros Zenobia
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve Kimotoro Directive
|
Posted - 2006.07.27 17:56:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Carebears have powers. They make HACs and T2 prices out of PvP reach.
And how much do you charge for vagas again Jenny?
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |