Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Gevlon Goblin
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
389
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 11:57:23 -
[1] - Quote
Phoebe patch of EVE introduced a very unintuitive change: a direct nerf to PvP in order to increase PvP activity. Using the jump drive of a ship or taking a jump bridge placed a timer on the pilot that barred him from quick re-jumping. A fatigue was also introduced that penalized re-jumping in a moderate amount of time by increasing the next timer. As travelers could calculate with these timers and simply include AFK stops, this change intentionally hit hunters who wished to travel fast to catch their prey.
The straightforward result is less successful hunts, so less PvP. On the contrary, PvP increased in nullsec after Phoebe. The reason was that smaller entities dared to undock and fight as the threat of being squashed by huge entities diminished. They created lots of small encounters which outnumbered the few big hunts of the big ones, resulting in increased PvP activity.
PvE is in an even worse shape. PLEX prices nearly doubled in the past year, showing serious devaluing of time spent doing PvE. Why? Because multiboxing no-lifers and bots pour out ISK and minerals in ridiculous amounts. The casual player who could do PvE 1 hours a day with his one account is stomped by the no-lifers and bots who are "playing" 10+ hours with 10+ accounts. A casual miner can earn 20M/hour max in highsec, demanding 40 hours to get the ISK he could get by spending some real money for a PLEX. In the meantime a ratting botter gets his PLEX in a night while asleep.
Just like it was unreasonable to undock a solo carrier before Phoebe, it's unreasonable to undock a solo mining or ratting ship. The players who liked this aspect of the game had less and less reason to log in.
The solution is a Phoebe for PvE: making room for the countless little guys by stopping the few big guys to stomp them out. The PvE-fatigue should be introduced: if you are in combat with NPCs, running mining modules or using the PI interface, you accumulate fatigue which diminishes over time. If your fatigue gets over the limit, your DPS against NPCs and mining yield starts to diminish, penalizing continuation. After a high fatigue you are also locked out of PI interface. Since PvE alts are much cheaper to train than proper PvP pilots, the fatigue would be bypassed by alts, so needs to be account-wide. This way the no-lifer or botter needs to use extra PLEX-es to keep running.
Let's calibrate the fatigue to kick in after 1 hour/day farming - which is more than enough for a casual player if we want him to do other things than farming! Of course give enough buffer before penalties so he can spend all his weekly farming time on weekend. This way low-efficiency activities like highsec mining and battlecruiser bot-ratting would become unsustainable: if you can mine just 30 hours a month, you simply can't earn a PLEX. This would stop many farmers and would take the edge of multiboxing. Of course high-intensity activities like carrier ratting, gas mining or incursions would allow a good player to still go infinite.
The real result would be the same as with Phoebe. The PvP-er of a local small corp don't have to travel to use his carrier, so he is unaffected. The casual miner or ratter already pays for his account, and wouldn't PvE enough to get fatigue penalty so his PvE has no new costs. Without the insane competition of no-lifers and bots, his earnings would actually worth something and he'd be encouraged to continue.
PS: trading is PvP, please don't be the moron who suggest fatigue on setting/modifying orders!
My blog: greedygoblin.blogspot.com
|
Null Infinity
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
14
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 12:07:15 -
[2] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote: if you can mine just 30 hours a month, you simply can't earn a PLEX.
TL;DR version: if player plays longer, than Gevlon Goblin allows him to play, CCP should punish him with some fartique or how is it called.
-1. Even -100. Go play WoT, you ****.
|
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
929
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 12:14:02 -
[3] - Quote
I dare everyone to ignore this an allow it to gracefully fall to the bottom of the forums. |
El Creepo
Sex Machineguns
16
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 12:42:49 -
[4] - Quote
1bil for a -ú10 item is an EXTREEEEEEEMLY good deal. If I could cash out all my isk at 1bil per -ú10 cash I would be doing that all over the place. People need to stop crying at plex prices. |
Tabyll Altol
Breaking.Bad Circle-Of-Two
85
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 13:58:17 -
[5] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:Phoebe patch of EVE introduced a very unintuitive change: a direct nerf to PvP in order to increase PvP activity. Using the jump drive of a ship or taking a jump bridge placed a timer on the pilot that barred him from quick re-jumping. A fatigue was also introduced that penalized re-jumping in a moderate amount of time by increasing the next timer. As travelers could calculate with these timers and simply include AFK stops, this change intentionally hit hunters who wished to travel fast to catch their prey. The straightforward result is less successful hunts, so less PvP. On the contrary, PvP increased in nullsec after Phoebe. The reason was that smaller entities dared to undock and fight as the threat of being squashed by huge entities diminished. They created lots of small encounters which outnumbered the few big hunts of the big ones, resulting in increased PvP activity. PvE is in an even worse shape. PLEX prices nearly doubled in the past year, showing serious devaluing of time spent doing PvE. Why? Because multiboxing no-lifers and bots pour out ISK and minerals in ridiculous amounts. The casual player who could do PvE 1 hours a day with his one account is stomped by the no-lifers and bots who are "playing" 10+ hours with 10+ accounts. A casual miner can earn 20M/hour max in highsec, demanding 40 hours to get the ISK he could get by spending some real money for a PLEX. In the meantime a ratting botter gets his PLEX in a night while asleep. Just like it was unreasonable to undock a solo carrier before Phoebe, it's unreasonable to undock a solo mining or ratting ship. The players who liked this aspect of the game had less and less reason to log in. The solution is a Phoebe for PvE: making room for the countless little guys by stopping the few big guys to stomp them out. The PvE-fatigue should be introduced: if you are in combat with NPCs, running mining modules or using the PI interface, you accumulate fatigue which diminishes over time. If your fatigue gets over the limit, your DPS against NPCs and mining yield starts to diminish, penalizing continuation. After a high fatigue you are also locked out of PI interface. Since PvE alts are much cheaper to train than proper PvP pilots, the fatigue would be bypassed by alts, so needs to be account-wide. This way the no-lifer or botter needs to use extra PLEX-es to keep running. Let's calibrate the fatigue to kick in after 1 hour/day farming - which is more than enough for a casual player if we want him to do other things than farming! Of course give enough buffer before penalties so he can spend all his weekly farming time on weekend. This way low-efficiency activities like highsec mining and battlecruiser bot-ratting would become unsustainable: if you can mine just 30 hours a month, you simply can't earn a PLEX. This would stop many farmers and would take the edge of multiboxing. Of course high-intensity activities like carrier ratting, gas mining or incursions would allow a good player to still go infinite. The real result would be the same as with Phoebe. The PvP-er of a local small corp don't have to travel to use his carrier, so he is unaffected. The casual miner or ratter already pays for his account, and wouldn't PvE enough to get fatigue penalty so his PvE has no new costs. Without the insane competition of no-lifers and bots, his earnings would actually worth something and he'd be encouraged to continue. PS: trading is PvP, please don't be the moron who suggest fatigue on setting/modifying orders!
I still think that 800 Mio is still to cheap i would consider to buy a plex when the price would hit about 1400 mio. But thats my buisness. The Plexprice is a easy thing from those who want them and those who sell them. They can be manipulatet like every item ingame.
Multiboxing/ botting is not legal so if there is a big problem ccp would have to create security mechanisms.
And the highsec income should not be raised. We need players move to low/wh/0.0.
An no more timers. There are already to much.
And if somebody manage 10 accounts mining then he should also get 10 times more than someone who only manage one account, don-¦t forget he have to make 10 times more isk for plexing the accounts.
-1 |
Gevlon Goblin
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
390
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 19:18:20 -
[6] - Quote
Null Infinity wrote:TL;DR version: if player plays longer, than Gevlon Goblin allows him to play, CCP should punish him with some fartique or how is it called. Actually after the fatigue stopped you from mining and ratting, you can start playing EVE.
My blog: greedygoblin.blogspot.com
|
Hopelesshobo
Tactical Nuclear Penguin's
441
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 19:23:09 -
[7] - Quote
Thank you OP for a good laugh -1
In fact, instead of just limiting PVE activity, why not make it so the player has to declare a prime time in which they want to play, and they get a 4 hour window in which the servers will let them login to the game?
Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.
|
Paranoid Loyd
4615
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 19:41:15 -
[8] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote: PLEX prices nearly doubled in the past year Should have left this out, made your troll obvious.
"Gankers are just other players, not supernatural monsters who will get you if you don't follow some arbitrary superstition. Haul responsibly and without irrational fear." Masao Kurata
Fix the Prospect!!!
|
Mario Putzo
1169
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 19:46:38 -
[9] - Quote
Lol basing an argument using PLEX as a reference.
Oh wait, a Goblin post...nvm. |
Elenahina
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
422
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 19:50:04 -
[10] - Quote
The OP lacks a reference to the Goonspiracy of nullsec driving Plex prices.
Came expecting Goonspiracy. Too fatigued to be upset about it. Also my four hour PvE window is about to expire so I need to haul some contracts, before my timer counter excludes the opportunity to EvP.
Agony Unleashed is Recruiting - Small Gang PvP in Null Sec
|
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
625
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 21:02:39 -
[11] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:Null Infinity wrote:TL;DR version: if player plays longer, than Gevlon Goblin allows him to play, CCP should punish him with some fartique or how is it called. Actually after the fatigue stopped you from mining and ratting, you can start playing EVE.
Well if all people would just stop yolo-carrier combat anomalies, EVE would become better at some point, but you are almost right. Why should someone not living in dull-sec make isk to buy gear?
We should all have to answer to you, your highness and never undock again.
signature
|
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
5268
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 21:45:28 -
[12] - Quote
Quote:Forum rules5. Trolling is prohibited.Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive, and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote. Thread closed.
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
Captain
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
Gevlon Goblin
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
398
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 18:39:56 -
[13] - Quote
I'd like to add the summary of what I wrote in a subsequent post. The ability to do low-intensity farming for extended times make one lazy. Instead of thinking to improve or compete for better farming sites, many-many just choose to farm more while watching TV or doing laundry.
EVE should reward the player being better and not letting his client run longer.
My blog: greedygoblin.blogspot.com
|
Iain Cariaba
1304
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 18:42:54 -
[14] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:I'd like to add the summary of what I wrote in a subsequent deleted link. The ability to do low-intensity farming for extended times make one lazy. Instead of thinking to improve or compete for better farming sites, many-many just choose to farm more while watching TV or doing laundry.
EVE should reward the player being better and not letting his client run longer. Go peddle your blog somewhere else. If you have something to say on the eve-o forums, say it on the forums. Don't try to feed your link counters.
EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
I couldn't have said it better.
|
Haatakan Reppola
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 18:53:09 -
[15] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:I'd like to add the summary of what I wrote in a subsequent post. The ability to do low-intensity farming for extended times make one lazy. Instead of thinking to improve or compete for better farming sites, many-many just choose to farm more while watching TV or doing laundry. EVE should reward the player being better and not letting his client run longer.
Rewarding active gameplay is NOT the same as limiting low effort activity. Im all for boosting active gameplay but im 100% against your suggestion |
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
548
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 19:10:43 -
[16] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:I'd like to add the summary of what I wrote in a subsequent post. The ability to do low-intensity farming for extended times make one lazy. Instead of thinking to improve or compete for better farming sites, many-many just choose to farm more while watching TV or doing laundry. EVE should reward the player being better and not letting his client run longer.
Directly punishes newbies who everything about the game is still cool and shiny by limiting their ability to make isk.. Especially as they haven't got the SP or player skills to run the higher intensity, better paying content. Which mean that they are hard capped on a very low income, and must spend many days/weeks to be able to afford the sort of hangar needed to be able to move to dullsec as a PVPer, or to afford the skillbooks and ships required to do well paid content in low, or to blitz missions in High. Grats, you just pulled the rungs off the ladder into the actual community that plays eve.
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
5371
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 19:20:07 -
[17] - Quote
Quote:Forum rules5. Trolling is prohibited.Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive, and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote. 17. Redundant and re-posted threads will be locked.As a courtesy to other forum users, please search to see if there is a thread already open on the topic you wish to discuss. If so, please place your comments there instead. Multiple threads on the same subject clutter up the forums needlessly, causing good feedback and ideas to be lost. Please keep discussions regarding a topic to a single thread. Closed.
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
Captain
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
Borat Guereen
Chao3 Chao3 Alliance
21
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 14:20:33 -
[18] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:EVE should reward the player being better and not letting his client run longer. Absolutely.
I would add also add that EVE, somehow, should not reward exponentially the multiplication of accounts controlled by the same players. This tendency occurs to the detriment of the casual or the more recent players.
Even if the idea is sound for your objective stated above, PVE fatigue would not really adress the benefits of accounts multiplication, much like the current fatigue does not affect a player with a lot of capital pilots accounts the same way that it affect a player with only one skilled capital pilot.
Speaker of Chao3
Porte Parole de Chao3
|
Borat Guereen
Chao3 Chao3 Alliance
21
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 14:23:13 -
[19] - Quote
James Baboli wrote: Directly punishes newbies who everything about the game is still cool and shiny by limiting their ability to make isk..
You are missing (obfuscating?) his whole point.
Much like PvP increases after capital fatigue, revenues from PvE would increase across the board, spreading the wealth to newbies doing PvE.
Speaker of Chao3
Porte Parole de Chao3
|
Basil Pupkin
Why So Platypus
176
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 14:23:36 -
[20] - Quote
I don't like you, Gevlon. I don't like ganktards, and you are one. At least not until Phoebe of ganking comes. But I don't like bots either, and it hits them harder than it hits the players.
So I guess this proposal have a right to live... as a concept.
Being teh freightergankbear automatically puts you below missionbear and minerbear in carebear hierarchy.
If you're about to make "this will make eve un-eve" argument, odds are you are defending some utterly horrible mechanics against a good change.
|
|
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
557
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 14:24:32 -
[21] - Quote
Borat Guereen wrote:James Baboli wrote: Directly punishes newbies who everything about the game is still cool and shiny by limiting their ability to make isk..
You are missing (obfuscating?) his whole point. Much like PvP increases after capital fatigue, revenues from PvE would increase across the board, spreading the wealth to newbies doing PvE. Mechanism? As in, how does this push income up anywhere, for anyone?
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1098
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 14:35:14 -
[22] - Quote
Could have sworn this drivel was locked yesterday. |
Zimmer Jones
Aliastra Gallente Federation
191
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 15:07:32 -
[23] - Quote
So, putting a time lock on how much players can enjoy their style if eve, yeah that'll keep people playing.
Less bulk miners = higher mineral costs, leading to more expensive ships and mods and higher plex prices. How does this help the single account player when multiboxers can just train more alts and just cycle through them?
Secret objectives complete? What's next ganker/hauler/market fatigue? How about graph and spreadsheet fatigue?
We get it: You hate eve. All you are doing is trolling players that make it what it is, and provide content JUST BY PLAYING in space.
You're still not winning at eve, but your wall of trollbait succeeded, kudos.
You are content to be content. This is not a jedi mind trick, its just a game
|
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
559
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 15:15:18 -
[24] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Could have sworn this drivel was locked yesterday. It was.
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
Gevlon Goblin
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
400
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 16:02:17 -
[25] - Quote
Haatakan Reppola wrote:Rewarding active gameplay is NOT the same as limiting low effort activity. Im all for boosting active gameplay but im 100% against your suggestion Actually it is. The activities are in competition and one of them being too lucrative is suppressing all others. When Drakes were nerfed, people started using other ships. Before that, fleet actions were Drakefleet vs Drakefleet.
James Baboli wrote:Directly punishes newbies who everything about the game is still cool and shiny by limiting their ability to make isk.. Especially as they haven't got the SP or player skills to run the higher intensity, better paying content. Which mean that they are hard capped on a very low income, and must spend many days/weeks to be able to afford the sort of hangar needed to be able to move to dullsec as a PVPer, or to afford the skillbooks and ships required to do well paid content in low, or to blitz missions in High. That's a bonus. Newbies should not learn that EVE is an Asian grinding MMO, where you need to watch mining lasers 10 hours a day on a solo Venture to "progress". Newbies should either join a group that gives out free ships for new members or salvage for a missioner or haul for contract or anything but mining in a Venture for hours or running L1 missions.
Borat Guereen wrote:I would add also add that EVE, somehow, should not reward exponentially the multiplication of accounts controlled by the same players. This tendency occurs to the detriment of the casual or the more recent players. The time limit helps. The multibox pilots are PLEX-ed, so they need to farm their running cost before making profit. With the limit it'll be much harder. Solo players already pay for their one account, so whatever they farm is income from the first penny.
My blog: greedygoblin.blogspot.com
|
|
CCP Logibro
C C P C C P Alliance
869
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 16:47:53 -
[26] - Quote
Please do not report this thread for trolling. ISD do not lock a thread just because you believe that the idea inappropriate. You are free to state that you believe the idea is bad, subject to the forum rules.
If you have questions about this, please file a support ticket.
CCP Logibro // EVE Universe Community Team // Distributor of Nanites // Patron Saint of Logistics
@CCP_Logibro
|
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1099
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 16:55:53 -
[27] - Quote
It's nothing to do with it being 'inappropriate' - it's straight up flame and troll bait, it's also a friggin repost of a locked thread. The idea itself being ludicrous is neither here nor there.
As to why it's ludicrous, way to put even more emphasis on isk/hour thus cementing older players vast income stream compared to newbies. |
Zimmer Jones
Aliastra Gallente Federation
191
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 17:26:18 -
[28] - Quote
I guess all my accounts are solo, because I pay the subscriptions. I'm considered a sucker, I suppose, but I love the game and it deserves my direct support. How do you pay for your accounts? I'm assuming you have multiple accounts, of course, but you've made pretty sweeping assumptions too.
Not judging people by how they pay, just pointing out that just because space rich people can pay by playing, some of us actually like the game enough to pay real money for it.
"Think of the newbies" is a terrible argument to make in regards to Plex prices, few newbies could afford a Plex in the first few months of play( possibly excepting market players), and once past those first months they're (bitter) vets. This was true even when Plex were first rolled out. At that time markets were crap; I bought domis for 80 mil a pop, trit was at an all time low, and several new players i introduced to eve then said they felt discouraged that they couldn't play for free from the first.
They're still playing now, and they don't Plex. Not for the price, but because the game is worth the price of a sub. Few of them multibox.
Might as well try the typical red herring gov'ts use: buying Plex supports terrorism or drugs or piracy. That'll be just as believable.
You are content to be content. This is not a jedi mind trick, its just a game
|
Gevlon Goblin
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
402
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 18:08:58 -
[29] - Quote
Zimmer Jones wrote:I guess all my accounts are solo, because I pay the subscriptions. I'm considered a sucker, I suppose, but I love the game and it deserves my direct support. How do you pay for your accounts? I'm assuming you have multiple accounts, of course, but you've made pretty sweeping assumptions too.
This case the idea helps you since your accounts will go as they are (since you are already paying for them by $), so whatever you farm is pure ISK for you. On the other hand many of your competitors will stop running their 40+ miners as they can no longer PLEX them. With them out of the picture, your farming will be more valuable.
My blog: greedygoblin.blogspot.com
|
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
564
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 19:06:48 -
[30] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:James Baboli wrote:Directly punishes newbies who everything about the game is still cool and shiny by limiting their ability to make isk.. Especially as they haven't got the SP or player skills to run the higher intensity, better paying content. Which mean that they are hard capped on a very low income, and must spend many days/weeks to be able to afford the sort of hangar needed to be able to move to dullsec as a PVPer, or to afford the skillbooks and ships required to do well paid content in low, or to blitz missions in High. That's a bonus. Newbies should not learn that EVE is an Asian grinding MMO, where you need to watch mining lasers 10 hours a day on a solo Venture to "progress". Newbies should either join a group that gives out free ships for new members or salvage for a missioner or haul for contract or anything but mining in a Venture for hours or running L1 missions.
Alright, so if you remove the ability to run lots of content for having to run bad content because you have low skills, and/or don't yet have the corp standings for lvl3/4/5 missions, newbies are now effectively required to join a corporation linked to a major income stream, like moongoo, to have access to any of the cool toys, like enough t1 cruisers to take your pick and use the right tool.
And because miners don't mine as much because they can't, prices for all t1 goods go up.
Self-sustaining accounts mean fewer people playing, means plex prices drop, but remain out of reach of casual players, because there is much less incentive to sell them, because there are so many fewer people willing and able to drop large chunks of isk for your medium handful of dollars.
And again, falls victim to malcanis's law, in that this change is now being tauted as for the newbie, but ends up almost exclusively benefiting the bittervet, whose higher isk/hr make them unquestionably better funded under a time cap..
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
|
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
564
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 19:10:09 -
[31] - Quote
afkalt wrote:It's nothing to do with it being 'inappropriate' - it's straight up flame and troll bait, it's also a friggin repost of a locked thread (or it's been unlocked repeatedly without anyone saying, which is poor form). The idea itself being ludicrous is neither here nor there.
As to why it's ludicrous, way to put even more emphasis on isk/hour thus cementing older players vast income stream compared to newbies. and such passive income as week long PI cycles, ship production from purchased minerals, moongoo and renter money.
I.e. if you don't have membership in a group with sov, or trillions of iskies, or are a merc getting paid to dec or a ganker, good luck affording cruisers to PVP in.
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
564
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 19:11:31 -
[32] - Quote
CCP Logibro wrote:Please do not report this thread for trolling. ISD do not lock a thread just because you believe that the idea inappropriate. You are free to state that you believe the idea is bad, subject to the forum rules.
If you have questions about this, please file a support ticket. Then the first, second and third (by my count) times this has been unlocked, there should have been a post about it not being considered trolling and why, as I still feel like this is either absolutely brilliant trolling, or the work of someone who need professional help.
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
Gevlon Goblin
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
402
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 19:16:21 -
[33] - Quote
James Baboli wrote: Alright, so if you remove the ability to run lots of content for having to run bad content because you have low skills, and/or don't yet have the corp standings for lvl3/4/5 missions, newbies are now effectively required to join a corporation linked to a major income stream, like moongoo, to have access to any of the cool toys, like enough t1 cruisers to take your pick and use the right tool.
Requiring players to cooperate with others in MMO in order to be successful isn't a diabolic plan. A solo newbie has 0.0 chance to get kills, as solo PvP demands the most skill. Why should he have more chance in solo ISK making? Of course he can remain solo and clueless, just without ISK and kills.
James Baboli wrote: And again, falls victim to malcanis's law, in that this change is now being tauted as for the newbie, but ends up almost exclusively benefiting the bittervet, whose higher isk/hr make them unquestionably better funded under a time cap..
Would be true if everyone would have one accounts. But account-wide limits hit N times harder on someone with N accounts. Newbies have one account.
My blog: greedygoblin.blogspot.com
|
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
564
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 19:23:28 -
[34] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote: Requiring players to cooperate with others in MMO in order to be successful isn't a diabolic plan. A solo newbie has 0.0 chance to get kills, as solo PvP demands the most skill. Why should he have more chance in solo ISK making? Of course he can remain solo and clueless, just without ISK and kills.
Requiring cooperation in something as complex and politically gamed as EVE without the ability to figure out the game mostly on your own is diabolical. Right now that path exists, but is a very hard path. Your idea puts an absolute gate on it.
Then there is the massive price change this would bring about for all minerals, and thus all t1 modules, the near total lack of meta modules from the massively reduced ratting, etc. More assets, be they isk or modules or ships, encourage more play.
Gevlon Goblin wrote: Would be true if everyone would have one accounts. But account-wide limits hit N times harder on someone with N accounts. Newbies have one account.
If your accounts are all making the same isk, being used for the same PvP, etc., that cap doesn't hit you any harder or less hard than someone with one account. Now, someone who is multi-boxing to sustain one shiny pvp toon? hits them right in the voonerables for a wrecking shot.
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
Madd Adda
74
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 19:49:49 -
[35] - Quote
Why are we even discussing this? What Gevlon is suggesting is for CCP to impose more restrictions to a "sandbox MMO". Jump Fatigue encumbers travel and PVP across distance, but doesn't stop/prevent PVP altogether, so why do this to gimp PVE? If you want a fatigue timer for PVE, then there should be one for PVP, simple as that.
It seems to me that Gevlon wants to force us into becoming content he would enjoy rather than considering why others play this game.
Carebear extraordinaire
|
Iain Cariaba
1309
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 19:59:50 -
[36] - Quote
Madd Adda wrote:It seems to me that Gevlon wants to force us into becoming content he would enjoy rather than considering why others play this game. That pretty much sums up everything Gevlon posts about.
EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
I couldn't have said it better.
|
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
568
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 22:22:02 -
[37] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote:Madd Adda wrote:It seems to me that Gevlon wants to force us into becoming content he would enjoy rather than considering why others play this game. That pretty much sums up everything Gevlon posts about. Which brings us to why it was reported as trolling. Specifically concern, with a dash of flamebait.
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
Gevlon Goblin
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
403
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 17:06:46 -
[38] - Quote
You seem to forget that in a competitive game everything that is possible and rewarding is mandatory. If your opponent farms 10 hours a day and you don't, he'll defeat you with superior resources.
Most players don't AFK mine because that's so much fun, but because they feel they have no choice if they want to remain competitive. Then they burn out and quit.
My blog: greedygoblin.blogspot.com
|
Zimmer Jones
Aliastra Gallente Federation
191
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 17:13:46 -
[39] - Quote
Or they could rat, run anoms, fw, wormholes, gank, etc.
Its a players choice if she or he chooses a more active activity for isk/hr, or feels pressured to do mindless tasks for it. Stop pouring concrete in the sandbox.
You are content to be content. This is not a jedi mind trick, its just a game
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2788
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 19:03:53 -
[40] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:Phoebe patch of EVE introduced a very unintuitive change: a direct nerf to PvP in order to increase PvP activity. Using the jump drive of a ship or taking a jump bridge placed a timer on the pilot that barred him from quick re-jumping. A fatigue was also introduced that penalized re-jumping in a moderate amount of time by increasing the next timer. As travelers could calculate with these timers and simply include AFK stops, this change intentionally hit hunters who wished to travel fast to catch their prey. The straightforward result is less successful hunts, so less PvP. On the contrary, PvP increased in nullsec after Phoebe. The reason was that smaller entities dared to undock and fight as the threat of being squashed by huge entities diminished. They created lots of small encounters which outnumbered the few big hunts of the big ones, resulting in increased PvP activity. PvE is in an even worse shape. PLEX prices nearly doubled in the past year, showing serious devaluing of time spent doing PvE. Why? Because multiboxing no-lifers and bots pour out ISK and minerals in ridiculous amounts. The casual player who could do PvE 1 hours a day with his one account is stomped by the no-lifers and bots who are "playing" 10+ hours with 10+ accounts. A casual miner can earn 20M/hour max in highsec, demanding 40 hours to get the ISK he could get by spending some real money for a PLEX. In the meantime a ratting botter gets his PLEX in a night while asleep. Just like it was unreasonable to undock a solo carrier before Phoebe, it's unreasonable to undock a solo mining or ratting ship. The players who liked this aspect of the game had less and less reason to log in. The solution is a Phoebe for PvE: making room for the countless little guys by stopping the few big guys to stomp them out. The PvE-fatigue should be introduced: if you are in combat with NPCs, running mining modules or using the PI interface, you accumulate fatigue which diminishes over time. If your fatigue gets over the limit, your DPS against NPCs and mining yield starts to diminish, penalizing continuation. After a high fatigue you are also locked out of PI interface. Since PvE alts are much cheaper to train than proper PvP pilots, the fatigue would be bypassed by alts, so needs to be account-wide. This way the no-lifer or botter needs to use extra PLEX-es to keep running. Let's calibrate the fatigue to kick in after 1 hour/day farming - which is more than enough for a casual player if we want him to do other things than farming! Of course give enough buffer before penalties so he can spend all his weekly farming time on weekend. This way low-efficiency activities like highsec mining and battlecruiser bot-ratting would become unsustainable: if you can mine just 30 hours a month, you simply can't earn a PLEX. This would stop many farmers and would take the edge of multiboxing. Of course high-intensity activities like carrier ratting, gas mining or incursions would allow a good player to still go infinite. The real result would be the same as with Phoebe. The PvP-er of a local small corp don't have to travel to use his carrier, so he is unaffected. The casual miner or ratter already pays for his account, and wouldn't PvE enough to get fatigue penalty so his PvE has no new costs. Without the insane competition of no-lifers and bots, his earnings would actually worth something and he'd be encouraged to continue. PS: trading is PvP, please don't be the moron who suggest fatigue on setting/modifying orders!
TL;DR...
People playing the game outside PvP is bad. Stop them.
Errr no.
Edit: And don't touch my PvE/income generating process either!! I'm a special snowflake. Rent seeking noted. Now bugger off.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
|
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2809
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 19:04:06 -
[41] - Quote
PVE Fatigue means mineral streams begin to slow down T1 prices go up, Explorers do not hack as many cans making invention prices go up, players would soon be quitting because everything gets too expensive to use, fewer players makes PVPer quit as there are less targets.
Eventually the only player left would be Gevlon Goblin and hid PVE fatigue.
Roleplaying Trinkets for Explorers and Collectors
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2788
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 19:12:47 -
[42] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:EVE should reward the player being better and not letting his client run longer.
While this sounds like a reasonable position I'd like to point out that this is perfectly in accord with Malcanis' law. Simply by virtue of the fact that I started this game almost 8 years ago I play better than any new player can ever hope. In a few minutes I'll earn far, far more than a new player. The new players will be much more likely to be impacted by this than I.
I'll also note that Gevlon's declaration that station trading is in fact PvP carries with the putrid stench of self-serving avarice.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1112
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 19:18:49 -
[43] - Quote
I just saw this thread... is this guy seriously saying that the alts I use for PI production (not a small amount of effort to manage in losec) should incur fatigue on my exploring main who engages in competitive PvP through explo? The phrase that springs to mind rhymes with duck cough... |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2790
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 19:19:28 -
[44] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:You seem to forget that in a competitive game everything that is possible and rewarding is mandatory. If your opponent farms 10 hours a day and you don't, he'll defeat you with superior resources.
Most players don't AFK mine because that's so much fun, but because they feel they have no choice if they want to remain competitive. Then they burn out and quit.
No they AFK mine because they are likely at their computer doing something else and figure with mining it can be done [semi] AFK.
Amazingly, I don't use isboxer or any other such tools, I have plenty of isk and I don't feel like I need to get isboxer to "remain" competitive...
By the way, we aren't competing with the people you are worried about. After all, they are only sitting in anoms all day long. In fact, I can defeat them and all I is a brand new character who spent just enough time to fit a prototype cloaking device then get said character in their ratting system at a safe and cloaked up. Then after a few days I come to the forums and read their rage posts.
Seriously, your monomaniacal focus on just isk as the only metric to who wins Eve is tiresome.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2790
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 19:27:05 -
[45] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:Haatakan Reppola wrote:Rewarding active gameplay is NOT the same as limiting low effort activity. Im all for boosting active gameplay but im 100% against your suggestion Actually it is. The activities are in competition and one of them being too lucrative is suppressing all others. When Drakes were nerfed, people started using other ships. Before that, fleet actions were Drakefleet vs Drakefleet.
Do you not see that you are just...well not thinking clearly. If activities are in competition then by definition they are PvP. Everything in this game is PvP to varying degrees. Two competing miners show up in a HS belt, its a race to see who can suck up the most valuable ores first. One might just figure it isn't worth it and goes [semi] AFK...but still PvP.
Really, you see things as black-and-white. If it is PvE it cannot be PvP. If it is PvP it cannot be PvE. In reality the distinction is far less clear. A guy ratting in his carrier (rather dumb) gets tackled and bleats for help...now we have PvP. Station trading is both PvE and PvP. Yes you are competing against other players...but also the game environment...for example what will the Ore change in sov null mean for setting up buy and sell orders? Will a major war interrupt the flow of certain resources?
So, can you please ask ISD to lock your thread? It may not be trolling, a debatable proposition, but it was damn silly and not very well thought out.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Lord Battlestar
Faulcon de Lazy
211
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 20:06:23 -
[46] - Quote
Interesting to me that the only major part of the eve economy you participate on this list is not included. If anything I'd wager that you have tons and tons of stockpiles of items you can sell after the proposed changes for a substantial profit. Because of that, it is easy to see your proposed changes would do nothing but make your wallet richer, and everyone else poorer.
I once podded myself by blowing a huge fart.
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2792
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 23:45:47 -
[47] - Quote
The player with multiple accounts will still always have advantage. Also a player that wants to mine, do PI and periodically rat will be really hit hard by this even if he has a single account. Being told you can only play 1 hour a day unless it is a Gevlon Goblin activity sure will boost players being online, being a new player, and player retention. This is one of the stupidest ideas to grace this forum.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
245
|
Posted - 2015.04.26 14:05:36 -
[48] - Quote
-1 Your PvE fatigue issue will have 0 (zero) positive affects on the game, but the negative affects will be huge.
-1 When cap ship pilots run into fatigue related restrictions they have a choice, jump into sub-caps and keep playing or sit out the timer and do nothing. The point being they have a choice. When a PvE player runs into your ridiculous fatigue timer they have no choices but dock up and do nothing or simply log off to wait out your timer. Oh and I can see your post now and the answer is no this WILL NOT drive players to PvP(shoot other player ships definition inserted here). Those who enjoy shooting other players do so, those who do not never will.
-1 I spend most of my time working with new players which means I spend most of my game time flying lvl 4 missions to boost THEIR standings and ISK earning abilities and this idea would put a severe limitation on my ability to do that. How does this help the game overall?
-1 There are areas of concern regarding all of the various flavors of PvE activities in EvE but this idea is a band aid patch intended to restrict a players ability to do what they want and it does nothing to solve the reasons why these troubled areas exist.
-1 Simply because fatigue was and is a needed step to control the PvP activities in nul and rejuvenate that portion of the game does not mean that the same idea can or should be applied to ALL areas of the game. Nul presents a very unique set of circumstances and challenges to CCP that simply do not exist in any other area of the game and it required a unique solution.
-1 If botting is a problem in the PvE area then come up with ideas that address that specific issue instead of putting a crimp in every ones game play style.
I get the feeling the OP is one of those cap ship pilots that often runs into fatigue timer restrictions on his game play and simply wants to force this onto others. Got an idea for you, adapt your game play to the PvE way and enjoy endless hours of doing whatever you want with no fatigue problems in sight. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
932
|
Posted - 2015.04.26 14:43:43 -
[49] - Quote
This is a terrible idea, even for you.
If you want to keep your competition from making ISK more than you think they should, undock a spaceship and make them stop. Otherwise, go back to your troll cave and stop bad posting.
The Greatest Ship Ever. Credit to Shahfluffers.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1107
|
Posted - 2015.04.26 14:44:54 -
[50] - Quote
Apply to trading. Modify an order once per 24H
How'd you like them apples, OP? |
|
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
616
|
Posted - 2015.04.26 16:20:20 -
[51] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:You seem to forget that in a competitive game everything that is possible and rewarding is mandatory. If your opponent farms 10 hours a day and you don't, he'll defeat you with superior resources.
This has 2 issues.
One is you are assuming all have a you must destroy your enemy entirely mindset. Not all do. If bad player who farms pve real good is comfortable with undocking to die like a muppet several times....there are lots of Player B's who will collect those KM's and say thank you, again and again.
In the past I didn't shoot at say goons with the intent to shut them down one players at a time. I was NBSI...it could have been anyone, I just wanted the KM. You see...I found the secret to eve pvp is to just enjoy just doing it. I avoided the caod space drama as much as possible. I undocked, killed some things, don't die myself best case....called that a damn good day.
Second is you are assuming this ding on pve changes this. Since you conveniently left out market transactions....this is how many make their money.
Either personally as i in 0.0 had an alt make and sell stuff to keep in ships and then some. in close to 2 years out there I was deployed eve style 75% of the time.....no ratting on deployments really. Best present you'd get is a target with shinies...or a bounty on them.
Or from the corp/alliance. The moon goo still flows in the market with often updated prices in your idea chief. If home is SRP/FRP friendly (and stable) with your little exception here.....you aren't changing much versus non SRP. |
Gevlon Goblin
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
403
|
Posted - 2015.04.26 18:54:36 -
[52] - Quote
I can't believe that some people are so dumb to mention trading despite I explicitly told not to. Trading creates no ISK or material of any kind. Can only be performed via interacting other player. If you are left alone while trading, you make zero ISK, while you make maximum ISK if left alone while doing PvE.
Also, this suggestion would decrease trading income, as less materials would be traded and more people would turn to trading after their PvE time is out.
My blog: greedygoblin.blogspot.com
|
Arthur Aihaken
Jormungand Corporation
4371
|
Posted - 2015.04.26 19:17:56 -
[53] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:Most players don't AFK mine because that's so much fun, but because they feel they have no choice if they want to remain competitive. Then they burn out and quit. Or you killed them.
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
617
|
Posted - 2015.04.26 23:32:28 -
[54] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:I can't believe that some people are so dumb to mention trading despite I explicitly told not to. Trading creates no ISK or material of any kind. Can only be performed via interacting other player. If you are left alone while trading, you make zero ISK, while you make maximum ISK if left alone while doing PvE.
Also, this suggestion would decrease trading income, as less materials would be traded and more people would turn to trading after their PvE time is out.
This depends on what you make....and how you make it. I made a fair bit skipping the pvp part of the market you are on about. I'd say I have x runs of item(s) x,y,z from invent when in a player corp. People buying up a whole bunch of production runs were doing me a favor. Burned bpc's knowing I had it sold before its even in the oven...and I skipped the whole jita isk war mess. Lost mil here and there worth the dealing with less crap really. Tl;Dr....I worked a PwP angle. Player with player lol.
Also you goal seems to be shutting down the guy making 50 mil an hour for 10 hours. Tied to the above...this happens quite easily in manufacturing and trading. IF the goal is the shutting down the evil care/null bear....well shut down all the avenues. Wouldn't make the idea less crappy...but it be complete in its intent. I like complete ideas. At least everyone gets a bite of the crap sandwich. Instead I am going with 6 years in with potential market spikes on pve content drop items I can work some market speculation games. What is the angle you are working is something we have to wonder. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1114
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 02:27:24 -
[55] - Quote
I have two real problems with the idea (as above on the assumption it is serious). Many people do not PvP as they literally hate it. That's not to say that they won't do it if forced upon them in open space but that they would never choose to engage in it. This idea would be tantamount to limiting the amount of time they can engage in the aspects of the sandbox they enjoy. Players like myself would be impacted severely as I invent, haul, manufacture, occasionally mine, run explo sites and combat anoms, manage PI and market orders. I actually don't get time for PvP even if I wanted too.
Secondly this would inflict limits on those with accessibilty issues for whom PvP is practically impossible. |
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
617
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 03:50:39 -
[56] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:I have two real problems with the idea (as above on the assumption it is serious). Many people do not PvP as they literally hate it. That's not to say that they won't do it if forced upon them in open space but that they would never choose to engage in it. This idea would be tantamount to limiting the amount of time they can engage in the aspects of the sandbox they enjoy. Players like myself would be impacted severely as I invent, haul, manufacture, occasionally mine, run explo sites and combat anoms, manage PI and market orders. I actually don't get time for PvP even if I wanted too.
Secondly this would inflict limits on those with accessibilty issues for whom PvP is practically impossible.
I am under this situation. My eve is pve because its all I can really do. Might be on for 2 hour here and there if that.
I did pvp for a bit. While enjoyable it can be time consuming. waiting for form ups can and was burning up 1/4 to 1/2 of my game time alone. A reason why I left 0.0 tbh. Other reason is that if its near my bedtime, stuck in the depths of space and op not looking to end I'd log off. And place bets on my chance of making it back alive solo the next time I login.
BS ops? I have never lost a BS to pvp combat at least by another player tbh. Now self destructs when stuck in a safe and no fleet coming to tag along with days later....that I have done many times. better SD than dying like a muppet to camps in an unscouted bs. Former I don't crap up the KB with dying like a tard and getting the usual chats that can result.
I just got too old and too responsible at work to be useless drained from very short sleep cycles playing eve till the wee hours of the morning. Weekends I got a 5 year old son who has the oddest behavior. 5 days a week its a fight from hell to get him out the bed and ready for daycare around 0630. Weekend though....he gets up before that all by himself. then gets us....I can do more before 0800 on a Saturday than some people do all day lol. |
Gevlon Goblin
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
403
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 03:55:23 -
[57] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Players like myself would be impacted severely as I invent, haul, manufacture, occasionally mine, run explo sites and combat anoms, manage PI and market orders. I actually don't get time for PvP even if I wanted too.
Hauling, inventing, managing market orders or manufacturing would not be penalized, since these all need farmed materials first.
My blog: greedygoblin.blogspot.com
|
Madd Adda
76
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 04:06:27 -
[58] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Players like myself would be impacted severely as I invent, haul, manufacture, occasionally mine, run explo sites and combat anoms, manage PI and market orders. I actually don't get time for PvP even if I wanted too. Hauling, inventing, managing market orders or manufacturing would not be penalized, since these all need farmed materials first.
the issue is the fact that CCP would need to first announce the change first, which would lead to mass hording of supplies and from there eve becomes a seller's market.
I'll reiterate what I said earlier, either have timers on PVE and PVP (ship combat/engagement) or have neither at all. It's not fair for the rest of us who don't want to pvp and would rather quit.
Carebear extraordinaire
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2794
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 04:34:41 -
[59] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:I can't believe that some people are so dumb to mention trading despite I explicitly told not to. Trading creates no ISK or material of any kind. Can only be performed via interacting other player. If you are left alone while trading, you make zero ISK, while you make maximum ISK if left alone while doing PvE.
Also, this suggestion would decrease trading income, as less materials would be traded and more people would turn to trading after their PvE time is out.
Just because you said we can't doesn't mean it is forbidden. You are not ISD, you are not a Dev, your are just a player like the rest of...your overbearing ignorance aside.
Trading cannot be performed if some player somewhere does not create the material. The isk supply has to grow if the player base is growing otherwise there will be deflation. You really are ignorant of fundamental economic concepts.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2794
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 04:39:39 -
[60] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Players like myself would be impacted severely as I invent, haul, manufacture, occasionally mine, run explo sites and combat anoms, manage PI and market orders. I actually don't get time for PvP even if I wanted too. Hauling, inventing, managing market orders or manufacturing would not be penalized, since these all need farmed materials first.
Hauling, inventing and the like would be impacted because the farming would be impacted. Look, go back and re-read your economics on general equilibrium theory. ALL markets are connected. All of them. Even if you don't participate in say the datacore market, if that market is impacted it will have consequences BEYOND the datacore market. This isn't high level economics. You don't need to have studied dynamic models using optimal control theory or get out something like Kakutani's fixed point theorem...this is something you learn in your second semester of undergraduate economics. You know where you start to learn about complementary and substitute goods and that markets are interconnected.
Go back to graphing time series data and drawing dubious causality conclusions from that nonsense.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2794
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 04:45:30 -
[61] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:I can't believe that some people are so dumb to mention trading despite I explicitly told not to. Trading creates no ISK or material of any kind. Can only be performed via interacting other player. If you are left alone while trading, you make zero ISK, while you make maximum ISK if left alone while doing PvE.
Also, this suggestion would decrease trading income, as less materials would be traded and more people would turn to trading after their PvE time is out.
Unless of course you already have a bunch of stuff stockpiled....as I said, your blatant attempt at rent seeking is well...blatant. You don't get a timer and you get a price buff for whatever you have squirreled away in your hangars.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
617
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 05:28:01 -
[62] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Players like myself would be impacted severely as I invent, haul, manufacture, occasionally mine, run explo sites and combat anoms, manage PI and market orders. I actually don't get time for PvP even if I wanted too. Hauling, inventing, managing market orders or manufacturing would not be penalized, since these all need farmed materials first.
2 things....
I will assume his exploration and such is what gives some items to haul and sell. Probably helps pay for the build process too. Its like an ecosystem....you affect one area, others feel it too. I am not the market master I once was for sure....my rat killing pve funds my side indy stuff more now.
You also have not adequately explained why these activities need to be exceptions in the first place. Besides a rather vague well they are pvp like since player interaction. With this rather vague concept....all pve is pvp.
The 0.0 CA farmer undocked to do that farming.
Flew x systems to his fishing hole, that is x gates to catch him on (player interaction there).
In that system for 5 hours....that's 5 hours for roams to try for the km (player interaction there again).
No camps put up, no roams to hunt....its not the players fault. Its more the fault of game mechanics that makes massive blue balls a necessary evil in this game. Which is beyond the scope of this thread....also not fixable by pve timers either lol.
Low/wh...same thing. Not even touching empire since you will say anti gank ccp and such. I am talking roam has pure concordless access (off gates in case of low) to teach that farmer a lesson.
Here we get an aspect of pvp some do not like but it is part of the concept of pvp all the same. this aspect is trying not to die is also pvp. The hunter wants the prey. they prey does not want to die. Its now time to see who wants what they want more. Is the prey better at avoidance than the hunters at hunting? On both parties to work that out for themselves at that point. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1109
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 07:26:17 -
[63] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:I can't believe that some people are so dumb to mention trading despite I explicitly told not to. Trading creates no ISK or material of any kind.
So what? Your shiptoasting is all about 'the little guy' being stomped by the no lifer/bots. Trading applies too, just it doesn't suit you, does it? Well that's too bad, maybe you should have thought this nonsense all the way through before posting it.
There's a certain irony in you calling people dumb in a thread this bad. It's literally a new low for this forum. That is going some. |
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
248
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 13:29:13 -
[64] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Players like myself would be impacted severely as I invent, haul, manufacture, occasionally mine, run explo sites and combat anoms, manage PI and market orders. I actually don't get time for PvP even if I wanted too. Hauling, inventing, managing market orders or manufacturing would not be penalized, since these all need farmed materials first. The fatigue model you have based this on hits everyone that uses the jump drive mechanic in all it's forms. Yet here you are twisting it around so that it only applies to a portion of the people that are involved in PvE activities. Manufacturers, haulers, market traders and all would not be penalized and so would not see any affect on their game play or ISK making opportunities, while the miners, mission runners and the rest would be limited in game play and ISK making?
Damn just when I thought this idea could not get any worse.
I now fully agree with others take this crappy idea and stuff it somewhere so it will never see the light of day again.
|
Gevlon Goblin
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
403
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 18:57:57 -
[65] - Quote
Jump drive usage isn't a playstyle it's a tool. People don't jump because it's fun, they jump because it give them benefits. Not everyone jumps, since most ships (the ones used by newer or more casual players) don't have jump drives. By the Phoebe changes, the capital, supercapital, JF and jump bridge network owners (who are clearly not newbies or casuals) are nerfed, so the rest are better off.
AFK mining/ratting isn't a playstyle, it's a tool too. People don't "play" AFK because it's fun (it can't be since they aren't there to experience it), they do it because it give them benefit. Casual players don't have the time (by definition) for 10+ hours of farming, new players don't do it since they aren't invested in the game yet, nor they have the skills to earn significant income by it (10 hours of Venture mining is still crap income). By the proposed changes those who have the tools (veteran) and the commitment (no-lifer or botter) are nerfed, so the rest are better off.
My blog: greedygoblin.blogspot.com
|
Zimmer Jones
Aliastra Gallente Federation
191
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 19:42:19 -
[66] - Quote
So, life is not fair, people get what they work for, casual players don't get as much as hardcore players.
Sounds like eve is modeled after the real world. Your idea smacks of "no capsuleer left behind."
No capsuleer left behind=no capsuleer gets ahead, competition is stymied, game gets stagnant, people leave, gevlon ruins eve and trumps the goons who were " out to ruin eve."
Not subtle, and sounds like game enforced communism, and just like communism, it'll destroy whatever it attempts to fix for the peasants. But don't touch markets, because you don't want your playstyle affected.
You are content to be content. This is not a jedi mind trick, its just a game
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2801
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 21:28:45 -
[67] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:Jump drive usage isn't a playstyle it's a tool. People don't jump because it's fun, they jump because it give them benefits. Not everyone jumps, since most ships (the ones used by newer or more casual players) don't have jump drives. By the Phoebe changes, the capital, supercapital, JF and jump bridge network owners (who are clearly not newbies or casuals) are nerfed, so the rest are better off.
AFK mining/ratting isn't a playstyle, it's a tool too. People don't "play" AFK because it's fun (it can't be since they aren't there to experience it), they do it because it give them benefit. Casual players don't have the time (by definition) for 10+ hours of farming, new players don't do it since they aren't invested in the game yet, nor they have the skills to earn significant income by it (10 hours of Venture mining is still crap income). By the proposed changes those who have the tools (veteran) and the commitment (no-lifer or botter) are nerfed, so the rest are better off.
Wow, talk about wanting your cake and eating too. Yes, I see your point on the JD, JBs, etc. However, AFK mining/ratting is indeed a play style choice. A player can do those things actively or (semi) AFK. That many choose the semi-AFK approach does not make it a tool.
And your proposal will hurt both the new and the older players whether the older player plays 10 hours or 1 hour. As I pointed out I know more about the game than a new player. I also have more skill points and can fly better hulls, with better fits, and I have deeper pockets. In every way I have the advantage. By limiting the playing time of new players you are limiting their ability to catch up. In fact, I play far, far less now that I did early on....so it will very likely hurt newer players even more. For example, lets take this gem of yours,
Quote:10 hours of Venture mining is still crap income
Lets take this as true, for the sake argument. If 10 hours of venture income is crap...what do we call 1 hour? Absolute and utter sh*t income? How do you think a beginner would feel knowing that he has 1 hour to mine in that venture whereas I can log in and in that same hour cycle quickly through my alts/accounts and re-start my planets for PI and earn several orders of magnitude isk that he can?
Plus there is some sort of weird envy basis to your argument. My ability to play (PvE) is nerfed even though I can probably still make more than new players can as missions and mining are the main sources of new player income...which they'll need to buy the skills I already have not only bough, injected, but also in many cases skilled to level 5...so I'll still stomp all over them. Plus there are other things I can do to make isk that a new player will still be disadvantaged at. I could try trading, setting up a reaction farm, and as you yourself noted some income generating play will not be directly nerfed...so I can do those...better than the new player. For example, I have several alts that are also quite well skilled at inventing. I already have deep pockets so I can buy lots of datacores, raw inputs, and so forth to do T2 manufacturing. Plus, I know how invention, manufacturing and so forth works. I also have researched BPOs and piles of BPCs. And I'm not limited in terms of my time for making income in this way. Since for many new players this is not even an option until several weeks or even months into the game I'll just earn more and more and more isk while your suggested PvE fatigue will limit the amount of time these players can do things to earn isk (missions and mining).
You keep stating your basic premise over and over as if mere repetition will somehow make it true.
Zimmer Jones wrote:No capsuleer left behind=no capsuleer gets aNo capsuleer left behind=no capsuleer gets ahead, competition is stymied, game gets stagnant, people leave, gevlon ruins eve and trumps the goons who were " out to ruin eve."
Not quite. As an older player with a number of fairly decently skilled characters I have LOTS of options in terms of making ISK. Being an established member of a null sec alliance is another bonus. Notice that reaction farms are NOT one of the processes that are subject to fatigue. I could start a reaction farm and for a few hours a month make billions. I could easily make a billion isk a month and dodge the PvE fatigue issue as well. And as I noted invention/manufacturing are not going to be subject to fatigue and I have characters who can do that too. So in a month and avoiding PvE fatigue I could rake several billion a month. Note, I'm dodging fatigue for the most part so I'm not a "no lifer". In fact, I'll probably spend quite a bit less than the 30 hour "PvE" cap each month doing this.
What does a new player have in terms of building wealth? Missions and mining at first. Then if he has maybe another older/veteran player or a very good corp/alliance he might be guided into something else that he can do to help with making income such as showing him how manufacturing and research works so he can try to make isk via T1 manufacturing. But even that wont add that much. He could try trading as well, but if everyone is trading it becomes less profitable (more competition will drive prices down towards their manufacturing costs leaving less room for arbitrage).
Malcanis once wrote the following,
Quote:"Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
Gevlon's suggestion fits the bill perfectly here. He keeps saying this is for the good of the new player, but a new player who plays for more than 30 hours a month is going to get his game nerfed when it comes to acquiring wealth. And that lack of wealth will mean slower skill accumulation. Leaving him with the crap end of the stick.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1116
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 02:23:50 -
[68] - Quote
Teckos wrote:...lots of good points....
There is also the point that the OP actively stops PvE players enjoying the game whereas JB and JD fatigue does not stop PvP players from playing, simply makes them choose other hulls.
Any mechanic that stops a player doing what they prefer (other than player interference of course) is in my opinion a bad idea. |
Gevlon Goblin
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
405
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 03:58:02 -
[69] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: There is also the point that the OP actively stops PvE players enjoying the game whereas JB and JD fatigue does not stop PvP players from playing, simply makes them choose other hulls.
"Choosing other hulls" is available for PvE players hitting the fatigue: they can grab a hauling ship and do contract hauling or buy low, haul, sell high. They can grab a Noctis and salvage what they've (and others) killed. They can grab a salvaging destroyer and loot/salvage after suicide gankers. Finally, they can grab their brain and figure out how could they use their limited farming time better.
Zimmer Jones wrote:So, life is not fair, people get what they work for, casual players don't get as much as hardcore players. Sounds like eve is modeled after the real world. Your idea smacks of "no capsuleer left behind." Absolutely and totally not. Competition in real world is about performing better and not longer. No one suggests "flip burgers for 16 hours a day, 7 days a week" as a way of getting rich. They suggest to study and get complicated and well-paying jobs like doctor or engineer. Currently in EVE "being skilled" is secondary to "have lot of time". A scripted bot, "who" is dumber than the dumbest person possible is more successful in EVE than most players. EVE supposed to be a hard game and not an easy but very grindy one.
Teckos Pech wrote: If 10 hours of venture income is crap...what do we call 1 hour? Absolute and utter sh*t income? How do you think a beginner would feel knowing that he has 1 hour to mine in that venture whereas I can log in and in that same hour cycle quickly through my alts/accounts and re-start my planets for PI and earn several orders of magnitude isk that he can? Indeed, and that's why newbies should learn early on to not mine in a Ventrure at all. He should find higher paying jobs from other players (mission salvager, hauler, SRP-living PvP-er) instead of getting crap income from Venture mining and L1 missions and try to compensate by "playing" for 10 hours a day.
My blog: greedygoblin.blogspot.com
|
Phaade
Perimeter Defense Systems Templis CALSF
331
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 04:19:12 -
[70] - Quote
afkalt wrote:It's nothing to do with it being 'inappropriate' - it's straight up flame and troll bait, it's also a friggin repost of a locked thread (or it's been unlocked repeatedly without anyone saying, which is poor form). The idea itself being ludicrous is neither here nor there.
As to why it's ludicrous, way to put even more emphasis on isk/hour thus cementing older players vast income stream compared to newbies.
Flame and troll bait?
The drivel you just posted is flame and troll bait.
Edit: like it or not, the man has a point. Ridiculous solution is ridiculous, though. |
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1117
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 04:19:15 -
[71] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: There is also the point that the OP actively stops PvE players enjoying the game whereas JB and JD fatigue does not stop PvP players from playing, simply makes them choose other hulls.
"Choosing other hulls" is available for PvE players hitting the fatigue: they can grab a hauling ship and do contract hauling or buy low, haul, sell high. They can grab a Noctis and salvage what they've (and others) killed. They can grab a salvaging destroyer and loot/salvage after suicide gankers. Finally, they can grab their brain and figure out how could they use their limited farming time better. Zimmer Jones wrote:So, life is not fair, people get what they work for, casual players don't get as much as hardcore players. Sounds like eve is modeled after the real world. Your idea smacks of "no capsuleer left behind." Absolutely and totally not. Competition in real world is about performing better and not longer. No one suggests "flip burgers for 16 hours a day, 7 days a week" as a way of getting rich. They suggest to study and get complicated and well-paying jobs like doctor or engineer. Currently in EVE "being skilled" is secondary to "have lot of time". A scripted bot, "who" is dumber than the dumbest person possible is more successful in EVE than most players. EVE supposed to be a hard game and not an easy but very grindy one. Teckos Pech wrote: If 10 hours of venture income is crap...what do we call 1 hour? Absolute and utter sh*t income? How do you think a beginner would feel knowing that he has 1 hour to mine in that venture whereas I can log in and in that same hour cycle quickly through my alts/accounts and re-start my planets for PI and earn several orders of magnitude isk that he can? Indeed, and that's why newbies should learn early on to not mine in a Ventrure at all. He should find higher paying jobs from other players (mission salvager, hauler, SRP-living PvP-er) instead of getting crap income from Venture mining and L1 missions and try to compensate by "playing" for 10 hours a day.
My point is that your suggestion will actively stop players from performing their preferred activities. Whether bots can be more successful is irrelevant to whether a player chooses to perform a task or not. If you don't like afk miners I would suggest that as a PvP player you go and gank them to change their behaviour. It would be a good use of your time whilst sitting out jump fatigue timers. Jump fatigue does not stop you engaging in PvP but simply curtails excessive power projection. Your suggestion actively limits others activities.
For example I and many others I know will mine whilst at work. We are ATK and depending on who is behind us will have the window open or at least fly properly tanked procs/skiffs. This gives a continued supply of minerals to markets and puts targets in space. It's up to other players to disrupt that, not some crappy mechanic. Jump fatigue is different in this sense as there was very little (if anything) that anyone could do to interfere with a massive fleet jumping stupid distances. |
Charis Braddock
The Scope Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 04:21:07 -
[72] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote: Also, this suggestion would decrease trading income, as less materials would be traded and more people would turn to trading after their PvE time is out.
Incorrect. If my PvE time is out, using your model, I would simply log off. After all, by limiting the supply of materials (your original proposal indicated that you wanted to stop the multi-boxing afk miner types), you would succeed in driving up the price of all goods associated with my PvE activities (cap booster charges, missiles, rail rounds, etc), so I would be less likely to buy/sell anything unless I had the funds for it and absolutely needed it.
So, as a newer player, you would succeed in ensuring that I didn't do anything further with the game as the increased cost of doing anything would make me more risk averse. Why would I risk my ship when it's liable to be blown apart and a replacement would take longer to purchase and fit (given that everything would be more expensive as there's less minerals and such on the market)? I may have a spare ship fitted up and ready to go, but if I unexpectedly get blown up in that one (for whatever reason) before I have the ISK to get the next fitted replacement, then my ability to make ISK has further decreased.
So, in that case I'd have to use the funds I've been saving up for the replacement to get a lower-class hull (e.g. from cruiser to destroyer), fit it, and take it out. Then I'd have to run the lower level missions with decreased ISK payout to try and recoup the money I've just spent getting the lower-class hull, and make more ISK to continue trying to get my next replacement cruiser.
That'd obviously take longer since I'm making less money than I was before (e.g. going from L3s down to L2s). But, it would take me even longer because I'm now bound by your 'PvE fatigue'. So, I'm going to be even more risk averse than I was when I had my spare cruiser ready to go.
You don't really think things through do you?
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2804
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 04:45:14 -
[73] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Teckos wrote:...lots of good points.... There is also the point that the OP actively stops PvE players enjoying the game whereas JB and JD fatigue does not stop PvP players from playing, simply makes them choose other hulls. Any mechanic that stops a player doing what they prefer (other than player interference of course) is in my opinion a bad idea.
Totally agree. If somebody has a day where he can play Eve all he wants (wife is out of town, whatever) who the **** is Gevlon Goblin to say, "No!"? Just some complete shiptoaster.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2804
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 04:50:17 -
[74] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:Teckos Pech wrote: If 10 hours of venture income is crap...what do we call 1 hour? Absolute and utter sh*t income? How do you think a beginner would feel knowing that he has 1 hour to mine in that venture whereas I can log in and in that same hour cycle quickly through my alts/accounts and re-start my planets for PI and earn several orders of magnitude isk that he can? Indeed, and that's why newbies should learn early on to not mine in a Ventrure at all. He should find higher paying jobs from other players (mission salvager, hauler, SRP-living PvP-er) instead of getting crap income from Venture mining and L1 missions and try to compensate by "playing" for 10 hours a day.
The venture is a decent mining ship for a beginning player. To say they should not use it is just stupid.
Some players in this game do not like PvP and working as a mission salvager will be limited because the guys who can run level 4s will only have an hour in which to do so. And what if a guy wants to mine for 2 or three hours? What if he wants to run missions with his corp for a few hours while chatting on coms
Do you even read your own posts, Gevlon? And who the **** are you to tell other players what they can and can't do in game?
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2804
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 04:53:32 -
[75] - Quote
Phaade wrote:afkalt wrote:It's nothing to do with it being 'inappropriate' - it's straight up flame and troll bait, it's also a friggin repost of a locked thread (or it's been unlocked repeatedly without anyone saying, which is poor form). The idea itself being ludicrous is neither here nor there.
As to why it's ludicrous, way to put even more emphasis on isk/hour thus cementing older players vast income stream compared to newbies. Flame and troll bait? The drivel you just posted is flame and troll bait. Edit: like it or not, the man has a point. Ridiculous solution is ridiculous, though.
Aside from the point on the top of his head what point would that be? That somebody using Isboxer still has an advantage? Well there is an obvious solution to that. Ban Isboxer completely. No trying to run 10 accounts will be very difficult. So much more simple, so much more elegant, and we don't have to take a giant crap all over the new players.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
249
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 13:48:08 -
[76] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote: "Choosing other hulls" is available for PvE players hitting the fatigue: they can grab a hauling ship and do contract hauling or buy low, haul, sell high. They can grab a Noctis and salvage what they've (and others) killed. They can grab a salvaging destroyer and loot/salvage after suicide gankers. Finally, they can grab their brain and figure out how could they use their limited farming time better. You just keep finding ways to make this worse for the new players and for CCP. So now CCP has to code this insane proposal so it tracks each players time doing a specific task, lets take salvaging for an example since you specifically state it.
Does CCP base this timer on the use of the salvage beam? If so does this fatigue limit apply to just the salvage beam, or does it apply to the salvage drones as well? Do they base it on the use of the tractor beams? If so does this limit apply to using an MTU since it has a tractor beam? Or do they base it on the hull you choose to use? If so how does this limit any ones game time which seems to be your goal here? Hit timer on a noctis, change to a salvage fit vex, then wash, rinse and repeat till I have used every sub cap hull in the game.
No matter how you try to work this around the objections the new players still end up getting screwed worse than the vets..
As a vet player with a large arsenal of ships at my disposal I can easily top 60 mil per hour happily blitzing my way through lvl 3 missions. A corp mate that has just made it to lvl 3 missions is lucky to make 10 mil to 15 mil in the same time.
My scanning character with lvl 5 skills, implants and the best equipment in the game can lock signatures significantly faster then a new player. This gives me a huge advantage and when combined with the array of combat ships I have that new players do not and again you screw the new player over far more than you do me.
Edit for this addition. No matter what the activity as soon as you place a time based limit on it the new players get screwed worse than the vat players will. |
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
619
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 14:59:12 -
[77] - Quote
Charis Braddock wrote:Gevlon Goblin wrote: Also, this suggestion would decrease trading income, as less materials would be traded and more people would turn to trading after their PvE time is out.
Incorrect. If my PvE time is out, using your model, I would simply log off. After all, by limiting the supply of materials (your original proposal indicated that you wanted to stop the multi-boxing afk miner types), you would succeed in driving up the price of all goods associated with my PvE activities (cap booster charges, missiles, rail rounds, etc), so I would be less likely to buy/sell anything unless I had the funds for it and absolutely needed it. So, as a newer player, you would succeed in ensuring that I didn't do anything further with the game as the increased cost of doing anything would make me more risk averse. Why would I risk my ship when it's liable to be blown apart and a replacement would take longer to purchase and fit (given that everything would be more expensive as there's less minerals and such on the market)? I may have a spare ship fitted up and ready to go, but if I unexpectedly get blown up in that one (for whatever reason) before I have the ISK to get the next fitted replacement, then my ability to make ISK has further decreased. So, in that case I'd have to use the funds I've been saving up for the replacement to get a lower-class hull (e.g. from cruiser to destroyer), fit it, and take it out. Then I'd have to run the lower level missions with decreased ISK payout to try and recoup the money I've just spent getting the lower-class hull, and make more ISK to continue trying to get my next replacement cruiser. That'd obviously take longer since I'm making less money than I was before (e.g. going from L3s down to L2s). But, it would take me even longer because I'm now bound by your 'PvE fatigue'. So, I'm going to be even more risk averse than I was when I had my spare cruiser ready to go. You don't really think things through do you?
well duh....you can go salvage for random players. (sarcasm ofc)
If they even let you lol.
First there is the trust issue. That noob could be an honest guy. Could also be setup for the warp to for people who can't even be assed to run a CO cloaked and roll the dice I won't see the probes fast enough. I pve I do it solo in empire. Paranoid a bit too much? Maybe. Has it avoided at least one gank set up? Most likely.
Then there is the whole well I trained my noctis or marauder for a reason. You got mouths to feed eve wise....so do I lol. Down to 1 hour cutoff...you won't be getting my scraps. I kind of need them more with this
Or you could haul. In which case if that is your life's goal....I'd recommend working for red frog. What op seems to overlook is public access hauling is crap really.
basically this idea is like curing athletes foot by blowing off your foot with a shotgun. To be honest...we are better off with the botters and farmers. Not even sure where he gets the pvp imba here. Null farmers, aka null bears, are about as risk averse as empire bears. They just fake the funk by saying but yeah I am in 0.0. knew many a null bear...you could set your watch for weeks on end by their login time. Just not on planned op nights.
Botters the same really. HAte to pick on the region and if better these days please correct me but...a few years back lets just say drone residents by and large didn't flock there for the allure of ample pvp. |
Lan Wang
Stillwater Corporation That Escalated Quickly.
442
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 15:44:58 -
[78] - Quote
people will just buy more alts 1/10 stop being silly
EVEALON Creative - Logo Design & Branding | Digital Design
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1122
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 15:56:14 -
[79] - Quote
Lan Wang wrote:people will just buy more alts 1/10 stop being silly
Out of curiosity...what was the 1 for?... |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1123
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 17:12:29 -
[80] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Lan Wang wrote:people will just buy more alts 1/10 stop being silly Out of curiosity...what was the 1 for?...
Having CCP officially lower the bar for a shitpost? |
|
uhnboy ghost
retard hills
30
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 17:13:27 -
[81] - Quote
this is a really bad ide...
as long as i pay for eve, no one is going to tell me how long i can do what i like to do in eve.
//uhnboy 84K probe scans in 2014 http://i.imgur.com/Uaid5iu.png
|
Lan Wang
Stillwater Corporation That Escalated Quickly.
442
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 17:16:53 -
[82] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Lan Wang wrote:people will just buy more alts 1/10 stop being silly Out of curiosity...what was the 1 for?...
sh*t idea
EVEALON Creative - Logo Design & Branding | Digital Design
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2808
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 21:05:30 -
[83] - Quote
Donnachadh wrote:Gevlon Goblin wrote: "Choosing other hulls" is available for PvE players hitting the fatigue: they can grab a hauling ship and do contract hauling or buy low, haul, sell high. They can grab a Noctis and salvage what they've (and others) killed. They can grab a salvaging destroyer and loot/salvage after suicide gankers. Finally, they can grab their brain and figure out how could they use their limited farming time better. You just keep finding ways to make this worse for the new players and for CCP. So now CCP has to code this insane proposal so it tracks each players time doing a specific task, lets take salvaging for an example since you specifically state it. Does CCP base this timer on the use of the salvage beam? If so does this fatigue limit apply to just the salvage beam, or does it apply to the salvage drones as well? Do they base it on the use of the tractor beams? If so does this limit apply to using an MTU since it has a tractor beam? Or do they base it on the hull you choose to use? If so how does this limit any ones game time which seems to be your goal here? Hit timer on a noctis, change to a salvage fit vex, then wash, rinse and repeat till I have used every sub cap hull in the game. No matter how you try to work this around the objections the new players still end up getting screwed worse than the vets.. As a vet player with a large arsenal of ships at my disposal I can easily top 60 mil per hour happily blitzing my way through lvl 3 missions. A corp mate that has just made it to lvl 3 missions is lucky to make 10 mil to 15 mil in the same time. My scanning character with lvl 5 skills, implants and the best equipment in the game can lock signatures significantly faster then a new player. This gives me a huge advantage and when combined with the array of combat ships I have that new players do not and again you screw the new player over far more than you do me. Edit for this addition. No matter what the activity as soon as you place a time based limit on it the new players get screwed worse than the vat players will.
Salvaging is apparently PvP as it wouldn't get a fatigue timer (IIRC). Which further highlights the nonsensical nature of this proposal.
Your post can be, if I may put words in your keyboard, be best summarized by Malcanis' law. As you point out...we've already run up a good portion of the learning curve and the skill curve. This proposal absolutely will not help the new players. It will make the game more complex and at the same time be more limiting.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2808
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 21:10:25 -
[84] - Quote
Lan Wang wrote:people will just buy more alts 1/10 stop being silly
Well no, the fatigue will be linked to the account and across accounts so you can't dodge it that way either.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Lan Wang
Stillwater Corporation That Escalated Quickly.
444
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 21:46:15 -
[85] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Lan Wang wrote:people will just buy more alts 1/10 stop being silly Well no, the fatigue will be linked to the account and across accounts so you can't dodge it that way either.
what? thats even worse than the op
EVEALON Creative - Logo Design & Branding | Digital Design
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2808
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 23:52:45 -
[86] - Quote
Lan Wang wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Lan Wang wrote:people will just buy more alts 1/10 stop being silly Well no, the fatigue will be linked to the account and across accounts so you can't dodge it that way either. what? thats even worse than the op
No, you are mistaken, that was NOT my idea, but in the OP, IIRC. I'll look and update.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
251
|
Posted - 2015.04.29 14:03:29 -
[87] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Your post can be, if I may put words in your keyboard, be best summarized by Malcanis' law. As you point out...we've already run up a good portion of the learning curve and the skill curve. This proposal absolutely will not help the new players. It will make the game more complex and at the same time be more limiting. I graciously accept the words you placed into my keyboard and thank you for them. However I thought it best to try a little larger hammer approach, since the OP does not seem to understand how this idea would be more of a burden on new players I thought it likely that he may not understand Malcanis law and all that other sophisticated kind of stuff. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2810
|
Posted - 2015.04.29 15:38:15 -
[88] - Quote
Donnachadh wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Your post can be, if I may put words in your keyboard, be best summarized by Malcanis' law. As you point out...we've already run up a good portion of the learning curve and the skill curve. This proposal absolutely will not help the new players. It will make the game more complex and at the same time be more limiting. I graciously accept the words you placed into my keyboard and thank you for them. However I thought it best to try a little larger hammer approach, since the OP does not seem to understand how this idea would be more of a burden on new players I thought it likely that he may not understand Malcanis law and all that other sophisticated kind of stuff.
There is no hammer large enough for Gevlon....
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
582
|
Posted - 2015.04.29 16:10:31 -
[89] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Donnachadh wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Your post can be, if I may put words in your keyboard, be best summarized by Malcanis' law. As you point out...we've already run up a good portion of the learning curve and the skill curve. This proposal absolutely will not help the new players. It will make the game more complex and at the same time be more limiting. I graciously accept the words you placed into my keyboard and thank you for them. However I thought it best to try a little larger hammer approach, since the OP does not seem to understand how this idea would be more of a burden on new players I thought it likely that he may not understand Malcanis law and all that other sophisticated kind of stuff. There is no hammer large enough for Gevlon.... 10Gt asteroid from high orbit should manage to impart something on his skull.....
Joking aside, there is always a bigger hammer.
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
272
|
Posted - 2015.04.29 16:49:36 -
[90] - Quote
Interesting concept, though I doubt it would really turn out the way you seem to expect. |
|
Gevlon Goblin
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
405
|
Posted - 2015.04.30 17:38:43 -
[91] - Quote
While starting other accounts to dodge fatigue is possible, it costs a PLEX. The point is that your first account is "free", since you run this account to play EVE. Whatever you farm on it is just a bonus. Farmers have lot of PLEX-ed accounts that they keep only to farm, not to play, they are hit much harder by this suggestion than players.
My blog: greedygoblin.blogspot.com
|
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
589
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 07:25:13 -
[92] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:While starting other accounts to dodge fatigue is possible, it costs a PLEX. The point is that your first account is "free", since you run this account to play EVE. Whatever you farm on it is just a bonus. Farmers have lot of PLEX-ed accounts that they keep only to farm, not to play, they are hit much harder by this suggestion than players. Start new trial account with buddy time. Use as low tier farming alt for 29 days. Toss a plex at it, to extend by 30days and get 30 days on main. ???? Profit.
Gratz. Instant boom on buddy system abuse because now alts on different accounts are mandatory.
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2811
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 18:43:28 -
[93] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:While starting other accounts to dodge fatigue is possible, it costs a PLEX. The point is that your first account is "free", since you run this account to play EVE. Whatever you farm on it is just a bonus. Farmers have lot of PLEX-ed accounts that they keep only to farm, not to play, they are hit much harder by this suggestion than players.
Well, I guess its a plus you admit it makes the game worse for everyone.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Hopelesshobo
Tactical Nuclear Penguin's
456
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 19:33:59 -
[94] - Quote
What about the people you can't play the game every day? Should we also limit PVE activity to say 2 days a week?
Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.
|
Gevlon Goblin
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
411
|
Posted - 2015.05.02 17:37:41 -
[95] - Quote
Hopelesshobo wrote:What about the people you can't play the game every day? Should we also limit PVE activity to say 2 days a week? Read OP again. Buffer was clearly stated. The buffer should be 14x bigger than the daily regen. So if you have no fatigue, you can PvE 14 days quotas at once before being penalized. Every day you aren't playing, one quota will be subtracted, so next time you play again, you'll have several quotas available.
My blog: greedygoblin.blogspot.com
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1126
|
Posted - 2015.05.02 17:56:32 -
[96] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:Hopelesshobo wrote:What about the people you can't play the game every day? Should we also limit PVE activity to say 2 days a week? Read OP again. Buffer was clearly stated. The buffer should be 14x bigger than the daily regen. So if you have no fatigue, you can PvE 14 days quotas at once before being penalized. Every day you aren't playing, one quota will be subtracted, so next time you play again, you'll have several quotas available.
Jump fatigue was introduced specifically to stop power projection, it does not stop a player wntering PvP. Why then should players be locked out of PvE activities for no sensible ( game or lore wise) reason? Are our clones so feeble that they can't concentrate for as long as a 21st century human??? |
Beta Maoye
63
|
Posted - 2015.05.02 19:32:06 -
[97] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote: Of course high-intensity activities like carrier ratting, gas mining or incursions would allow a good player to still go infinite.
What do you think if someone suggests PVE fatigue should only apply to carrier ratting, gas mining and incursions because he don't like those PVE activities and he think they contribute to part of reasons that PLEX price rises? |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2820
|
Posted - 2015.05.02 20:50:50 -
[98] - Quote
Not only is this suggestion unbalanced (and to be clear ANY suggestion that is to benefit some segment of the games population will be exploitable by others outside that target population), it indicates Gevlon hates markets.
Suppose we have a no lifer guy who sits around and PvEs and ungodly amount of time. He rats for 10 hours a day and makes something like 100 million an hour and he does it 20 hours a day. Now he makes 20 billion. That is alot of isk. However, he will buy PLEX and assuming he has lets say 5 accounts that means he'll be dumping 4 of 20 billion into the wallets of people who can't or will not play to the extremes he does.
Suppose we have another player, he makes a good living and likes playing Eve, but because he does have a life (that good living requires a job) and he decides he'll buy PLEX from CCP and sell them to our no lifer above. Now he can have some of that 4 billion whenever he sells to the no lifer or one of the other no lifers.
That guy who has pretty much made it his "job" to play Eve has an imputed monthly income about what...$400. Whereas our guy with a life might make 6 or even 10 times that...he could afford to buy a few PLEX and sell them. And thanks to the no lifer driving up PLEX prices that is actually more of a viable option. And if our guy with the life whips out his credit card and buys years subscription he pays far, far less than our no-lifer.
And our two players are unlikely to ever interact....aside from our casual guy with a life maybe killing our no lifer periodically. The guy with no life all he does is rat. It isn't like he is out there doing much else.
So I don't even see what the real problem is here. So one player, who only ever rats, has a fatter wallet than the guy who plays casually and sells PLEX to fund his in game activities. Personally, I'd rather know the guy with a life in game than the no lifer. The guy with a life when he does play is probably way more fun and if the no lifer inadvertently helps him play...great.
Basically, I'm kind of wondering...where is the actual problem that needs to be addressed.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1146
|
Posted - 2015.05.02 22:01:18 -
[99] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Not only is this suggestion unbalanced (and to be clear ANY suggestion that is to benefit some segment of the games population will be exploitable by others outside that target population), it indicates Gevlon hates markets.
Suppose we have a no lifer guy who sits around and PvEs and ungodly amount of time. He rats for 10 hours a day and makes something like 100 million an hour and he does it 20 hours a day. Now he makes 20 billion. That is alot of isk. However, he will buy PLEX and assuming he has lets say 5 accounts that means he'll be dumping 4 of 20 billion into the wallets of people who can't or will not play to the extremes he does.
Suppose we have another player, he makes a good living and likes playing Eve, but because he does have a life (that good living requires a job) and he decides he'll buy PLEX from CCP and sell them to our no lifer above. Now he can have some of that 4 billion whenever he sells to the no lifer or one of the other no lifers.
That guy who has pretty much made it his "job" to play Eve has an imputed monthly income about what...$400. Whereas our guy with a life might make 6 or even 10 times that...he could afford to buy a few PLEX and sell them. And thanks to the no lifer driving up PLEX prices that is actually more of a viable option. And if our guy with the life whips out his credit card and buys years subscription he pays far, far less than our no-lifer.
And our two players are unlikely to ever interact....aside from our casual guy with a life maybe killing our no lifer periodically. The guy with no life all he does is rat. It isn't like he is out there doing much else.
So I don't even see what the real problem is here. So one player, who only ever rats, has a fatter wallet than the guy who plays casually and sells PLEX to fund his in game activities. Personally, I'd rather know the guy with a life in game than the no lifer. The guy with a life when he does play is probably way more fun and if the no lifer inadvertently helps him play...great.
Basically, I'm kind of wondering...where is the actual problem that needs to be addressed.
Precisely. Apparently some people forget plex are not seeded.
If plex halved in value now, why on earth would ANYONE spend real money on something affordable within 1-2 hours PvE?
It wouldn't do anything more than utterly tank the plex market. Oh, and make holders of existing assets orders of magnitude richer overnight.
Frankly the only upside of this thread has been to lower the bar for shiptoasting. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2820
|
Posted - 2015.05.03 03:29:35 -
[100] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Not only is this suggestion unbalanced (and to be clear ANY suggestion that is to benefit some segment of the games population will be exploitable by others outside that target population), it indicates Gevlon hates markets.
Suppose we have a no lifer guy who sits around and PvEs and ungodly amount of time. He rats for 10 hours a day and makes something like 100 million an hour and he does it 20 hours a day. Now he makes 20 billion. That is alot of isk. However, he will buy PLEX and assuming he has lets say 5 accounts that means he'll be dumping 4 of 20 billion into the wallets of people who can't or will not play to the extremes he does.
Suppose we have another player, he makes a good living and likes playing Eve, but because he does have a life (that good living requires a job) and he decides he'll buy PLEX from CCP and sell them to our no lifer above. Now he can have some of that 4 billion whenever he sells to the no lifer or one of the other no lifers.
That guy who has pretty much made it his "job" to play Eve has an imputed monthly income about what...$400. Whereas our guy with a life might make 6 or even 10 times that...he could afford to buy a few PLEX and sell them. And thanks to the no lifer driving up PLEX prices that is actually more of a viable option. And if our guy with the life whips out his credit card and buys years subscription he pays far, far less than our no-lifer.
And our two players are unlikely to ever interact....aside from our casual guy with a life maybe killing our no lifer periodically. The guy with no life all he does is rat. It isn't like he is out there doing much else.
So I don't even see what the real problem is here. So one player, who only ever rats, has a fatter wallet than the guy who plays casually and sells PLEX to fund his in game activities. Personally, I'd rather know the guy with a life in game than the no lifer. The guy with a life when he does play is probably way more fun and if the no lifer inadvertently helps him play...great.
Basically, I'm kind of wondering...where is the actual problem that needs to be addressed.
Precisely. Apparently some people forget plex are not seeded. If plex halved in value now, why on earth would ANYONE spend real money on something affordable within 1-2 hours PvE? It wouldn't do anything more than utterly tank the plex market. Oh, and make holders of existing assets orders of magnitude richer overnight. Frankly the only upside of this thread has been to lower the bar for shiptoasting.
To be quite honest, I've been tempted to report as a rule 23 violation--post constructively. Since there is no problem, it is a biased and possibly exploitable suggestion, and limits play time when CCP would like to do precisely the opposite...just lock it.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
|
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
598
|
Posted - 2015.05.03 05:20:45 -
[101] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:
To be quite honest, I've been tempted to report as a rule 23 violation--post constructively. Since there is no problem, it is a biased and possibly exploitable suggestion, and limits play time when CCP would like to do precisely the opposite...just lock it.
Unfortunately, unlikely to do much because of Falcon. [Quote=CCP Falcon] Please do not report this thread for trolling. ISD do not lock a thread just because you believe that the idea inappropriate. You are free to state that you believe the idea is bad, subject to the forum rules.
If you have questions about this, please file a support ticket. [/quote[
Told us to stop reporting it, and kept re-opening it without comment.
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
Glathull
Warlock Assassins
1028
|
Posted - 2015.05.03 06:30:53 -
[102] - Quote
I propose a Goblin Fatigue mechanism . . . .
I honestly feel like I just read fifty shades of dumb. --CCP Falcon
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2435
|
Posted - 2015.05.03 07:24:38 -
[103] - Quote
I'm all for a rest mechanic similar to WoW, perhaps affecting damage. A tired capsuleer should take some penalties. Nobody needs to play 16-23.5 hours per day, every day. A rest mechanic penalizing people who play more than 112 hours in a week (sliding window) will only harm botters and people who really should get more sleep.
A Caldari is just a Gallente who begged to have their civil liberties taken away.
|
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
598
|
Posted - 2015.05.03 13:17:06 -
[104] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:I'm all for a rest mechanic similar to WoW, perhaps affecting damage. A tired capsuleer should take some penalties. Nobody needs to play 16-23.5 hours per day, every day. A rest mechanic penalizing people who play more than 112 hours in a week (sliding window) will only harm botters and people who really should get more sleep.
Now, explain why this is good for anyone. That it only harms people who are playing for a marathon session is insufficient reason to implement a feature if there is no clear cut upside anywhere.
It only harms no-lifers, but some of the best times I've had in eve have come from marathon fleets, in one case 53 hours of near continuous play. This was a special case (long weekend, girlfriends out of town, a couple other eve players co-located in meatspace) but it was still one of the best times I have had in eve.
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
Hopelesshobo
Tactical Nuclear Penguin's
459
|
Posted - 2015.05.03 14:10:21 -
[105] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:I'm all for a rest mechanic similar to WoW, perhaps affecting damage. A tired capsuleer should take some penalties. Nobody needs to play 16-23.5 hours per day, every day. A rest mechanic penalizing people who play more than 112 hours in a week (sliding window) will only harm botters and people who really should get more sleep.
A tired capsuleer does take penalties. The penalties include....
-Lower risk management (I can take on 4 guys at once) -Higher chances of making a mistake (Did I just click jump to or bridge to?) -Lower reaction time (Hey guys that tornado has me....nevermind he alphad me) -Not notice something important (How did I end up in low/nulsec? I should have gotten that low/nulsec warning box to pop up)
There are many more. So if anything, by encouraging people to turn off the game and get some sleep or go outside, you are encouraging people to not do as many things that will get them killed.
Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1126
|
Posted - 2015.05.03 14:28:50 -
[106] - Quote
Hopelesshobo wrote:Reaver Glitterstim wrote:I'm all for a rest mechanic similar to WoW, perhaps affecting damage. A tired capsuleer should take some penalties. Nobody needs to play 16-23.5 hours per day, every day. A rest mechanic penalizing people who play more than 112 hours in a week (sliding window) will only harm botters and people who really should get more sleep. A tired capsuleer does take penalties. The penalties include.... -Lower risk management (I can take on 4 guys at once) -Higher chances of making a mistake (Did I just click jump to or bridge to?) -Lower reaction time (Hey guys that tornado has me....nevermind he alphad me) -Not notice something important (How did I end up in low/nulsec? I should have gotten that low/nulsec warning box to pop up) There are many more. So if anything, by encouraging people to turn off the game and get some sleep or go outside, you are encouraging people to not do as many things that will get them killed.
My funniest loss was from a 2am 'last trip' to losec...early in my time here I had minimal decent modules so used to unfit/refit different haulers for hisec and losec. One night I hopped into my nereus, leapt through to Old Man Star only to find myself pinned and being gunned down...I was so bemused as to why I couldn't see the usual multi-wcs mods on the HUD that I entirely forgot to align and got podded too! I had of course forgotten to refit the nereus in my bleary eyed bad decision making state and hadn't even noticed the complete lack of anything until it was too late... |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2435
|
Posted - 2015.05.03 16:42:06 -
[107] - Quote
James Baboli wrote:Reaver Glitterstim wrote:I'm all for a rest mechanic similar to WoW, perhaps affecting damage. A tired capsuleer should take some penalties. Nobody needs to play 16-23.5 hours per day, every day. A rest mechanic penalizing people who play more than 112 hours in a week (sliding window) will only harm botters and people who really should get more sleep. Now, explain why this is good for anyone. It only harms no-lifers, but some of the best times I've had in eve have come from marathon fleets, in one case 53 hours of near continuous play. Well then it wouldn't affect you.
It would hurt the 23.5/7 bots but it wouldn't hurt actual players who actually play. If any actual players receive a penalty for it, it's probably helping them.
A Caldari is just a Gallente who begged to have their civil liberties taken away.
|
Zimmer Jones
Aliastra Gallente Federation
194
|
Posted - 2015.05.03 16:54:04 -
[108] - Quote
I remember some games used to have warnings for players after they played for certain extended times. Sometimes with health warnings.
You are content to be content. This is not a jedi mind trick, its just a game
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1149
|
Posted - 2015.05.03 17:22:42 -
[109] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:James Baboli wrote:Reaver Glitterstim wrote:I'm all for a rest mechanic similar to WoW, perhaps affecting damage. A tired capsuleer should take some penalties. Nobody needs to play 16-23.5 hours per day, every day. A rest mechanic penalizing people who play more than 112 hours in a week (sliding window) will only harm botters and people who really should get more sleep. Now, explain why this is good for anyone. It only harms no-lifers, but some of the best times I've had in eve have come from marathon fleets, in one case 53 hours of near continuous play. Well then it wouldn't affect you. It would hurt the 23.5/7 bots but it wouldn't hurt actual players who actually play. If any actual players receive a penalty for it, it's probably helping them.
Can we stop with the selectively applied ridiculous nerf ideas. 'It's ok as long as it doesn't affect me' is pathetic.
No-one, but NO-ONE is fit to judge how people spend their time.
Not to mention the extra stress this puts on the hamsters. Also, what happens in tidi?
The whole damn idea has more flaws than an underwater hairdryer and is fixing a problem which does not exist. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2824
|
Posted - 2015.05.03 22:02:05 -
[110] - Quote
James Baboli wrote:Reaver Glitterstim wrote:I'm all for a rest mechanic similar to WoW, perhaps affecting damage. A tired capsuleer should take some penalties. Nobody needs to play 16-23.5 hours per day, every day. A rest mechanic penalizing people who play more than 112 hours in a week (sliding window) will only harm botters and people who really should get more sleep. Now, explain why this is good for anyone. That it only harms people who are playing for a marathon session is insufficient reason to implement a feature if there is no clear cut upside anywhere. It only harms no-lifers, but some of the best times I've had in eve have come from marathon fleets, in one case 53 hours of near continuous play. This was a special case (long weekend, girlfriends out of town, a couple other eve players co-located in meatspace) but it was still one of the best times I have had in eve.
Heh...I know those times. Wife and kid out of town for several days...several days of (nearly) uninterrupted Eve time.
Still, the one's I see this getting at the most would be botters...but I have to wonder how many. A player who logs in that many hours has likely already drawn the attention of team security.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
|
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
601
|
Posted - 2015.05.03 22:08:25 -
[111] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:
Heh...I know those times. Wife and kid out of town for several days...several days of (nearly) uninterrupted Eve time.
Still, the one's I see this getting at the most would be botters...but I have to wonder how many. A player who logs in that many hours has likely already drawn the attention of team security.
Other, simpler and more effective ways of combating stupid bots, and smart bots are HARD. Having worked on some automated scripts for a game that ultimately died before release, and purely on making them smart enough to deal with unexpected situations, anyone who can get a bot past the Bayesian math that could be done if CCP crunches numbers hard is putting in way more effort for more risk than just being at their keyboard.
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2824
|
Posted - 2015.05.04 02:19:36 -
[112] - Quote
James Baboli wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:
Heh...I know those times. Wife and kid out of town for several days...several days of (nearly) uninterrupted Eve time.
Still, the one's I see this getting at the most would be botters...but I have to wonder how many. A player who logs in that many hours has likely already drawn the attention of team security.
Other, simpler and more effective ways of combating stupid bots, and smart bots are HARD. Having worked on some automated scripts for a game that ultimately died before release, and purely on making them smart enough to deal with unexpected situations, anyone who can get a bot past the Bayesian math that could be done if CCP crunches numbers hard is putting in way more effort for more risk than just being at their keyboard.
Completely agree.
And +1 for using the word Bayesian.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Gevlon Goblin
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
411
|
Posted - 2015.05.04 16:46:49 -
[113] - Quote
You are still evading the problem: currently ISK making depends more on playing time than on player skill. EVE supposed to be a hard game (rewarding those with skill) and not a boring grindy one (rewarding those with time, even if they literally lack braincells: bots)
My blog: greedygoblin.blogspot.com
|
Hopelesshobo
Tactical Nuclear Penguin's
462
|
Posted - 2015.05.04 17:13:42 -
[114] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:You are still evading the problem: currently ISK making depends more on playing time than on player skill. EVE supposed to be a hard game (rewarding those with skill) and not a boring grindy one (rewarding those with time, even if they literally lack braincells: bots)
Good luck making isk on manufacturing stuff without the appropriate skills to back up what you are trying to produce. Also good luck making 100 mil isk per hour in incursions if the entire fleet is made up of 1 month old chars.
Also, another thing I think is funny is when you said.
Gevlon Goblin wrote: PS: trading is PvP, please don't be the moron who suggest fatigue on setting/modifying orders!
There are NPC market orders that make up price ceilings in the game. When a player interacts with an NPC it is PVE. If someone exchanges a currency for a hard asset or vice versa, then it is trading. Therefore trading can be PVE.
Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2835
|
Posted - 2015.05.04 17:31:05 -
[115] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:You are still evading the problem: currently ISK making depends more on playing time than on player skill. EVE supposed to be a hard game (rewarding those with skill) and not a boring grindy one (rewarding those with time, even if they literally lack braincells: bots)
When it comes to making ISK Eve has always been a boring grindfest.
Your starting premise is wrong, which is why you have proposed such a boneheaded idea.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Gevlon Goblin
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
412
|
Posted - 2015.05.05 17:03:54 -
[116] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:When it comes to making ISK Eve has always been a boring grindfest. Time for a change then!
My blog: greedygoblin.blogspot.com
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2851
|
Posted - 2015.05.05 21:06:42 -
[117] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:When it comes to making ISK Eve has always been a boring grindfest. Time for a change then!
This wont change that though, it just limits the boring grindfest and frustrates players.
Suggest something to enhance PvE, not limit it. If anything CCP wants people to log in, not provide incentives to log out.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
1899
|
Posted - 2015.05.05 23:08:40 -
[118] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Gevlon Goblin wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:When it comes to making ISK Eve has always been a boring grindfest. Time for a change then! This wont change that though, it just limits the boring grindfest and frustrates players. Suggest something to enhance PvE, not limit it. If anything CCP wants people to log in, not provide incentives to log out. heres an idea to make endlessly grinding pvp harder without arbitrary ****, just give the NPC factions their own patrolling fleets/raids like the drfiters, thats what you rat, and missions involve you finding a fleet within a particular system.
and then for nullsec you have pirate/empire fleets responding to you based on your recent activity. shot at some sansha rats? sansha fleets roaming your space now.
and maybe of course give the NPCs their own miners and pseudo-player "accounts" to balance out their productive and unit-spam abilities to be on par with just a really dedicated player group, and you have artifically created a new faction fighting in high/low/null without having to cry about whos fault this blue doughnut or that stagnant space is
basically, make PvE take time, but pay out more, so overall it makes relatively the same as now, but the payout comes in larger more spread out chunks. basically no more AFK-running missions. |
ashley Eoner
472
|
Posted - 2015.05.06 02:00:26 -
[119] - Quote
Nariya Kentaya wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Gevlon Goblin wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:When it comes to making ISK Eve has always been a boring grindfest. Time for a change then! This wont change that though, it just limits the boring grindfest and frustrates players. Suggest something to enhance PvE, not limit it. If anything CCP wants people to log in, not provide incentives to log out. heres an idea to make endlessly grinding pvp harder without arbitrary ****, just give the NPC factions their own patrolling fleets/raids like the drfiters, thats what you rat, and missions involve you finding a fleet within a particular system. and then for nullsec you have pirate/empire fleets responding to you based on your recent activity. shot at some sansha rats? sansha fleets roaming your space now. and maybe of course give the NPCs their own miners and pseudo-player "accounts" to balance out their productive and unit-spam abilities to be on par with just a really dedicated player group, and you have artifically created a new faction fighting in high/low/null without having to cry about whos fault this blue doughnut or that stagnant space is basically, make PvE take time, but pay out more, so overall it makes relatively the same as now, but the payout comes in larger more spread out chunks. basically no more AFK-running missions. For the first day MAYBE.. I guarantee you within days people will be exploiting the mechanic in ways you could never of imagined.
Anyone truely AFKing missions are not making that much isk per hour anyway. |
Gevlon Goblin
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
412
|
Posted - 2015.05.06 17:28:41 -
[120] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Suggest something to enhance PvE, not limit it. If anything CCP wants people to log in, not provide incentives to log out. Enhancing PvE won't change the problem that those who grind 10 hours of "enhanced" PvE on 10 accounts get 100x more ISK than those who spend 1 hour on 1 account.
CCP wants you to do 2 things: - pay them subscription money - provide content for other players
A grinder drives out casual, subscribing PvE players and provide content to nobody as he is running an optimized farm that doesn't worth ganking and does no PvP.
My blog: greedygoblin.blogspot.com
|
|
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
606
|
Posted - 2015.05.06 18:07:15 -
[121] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Suggest something to enhance PvE, not limit it. If anything CCP wants people to log in, not provide incentives to log out. Enhancing PvE won't change the problem that those who grind 10 hours of "enhanced" PvE on 10 accounts get 100x more ISK than those who spend 1 hour on 1 account. CCP wants you to do 2 things: - pay them subscription money - provide content for other players A grinder drives out casual, subscribing PvE players and provide content to nobody as he is running an optimized farm that doesn't worth ganking and does no PvP.
So, the guy putting out at least 10x the effort-hours, and usually a higher level of effort during that time (due to the much harder nature of the level of multi-tasking for boxing efficiently, especially post ISboxer) should not be rewarded more? Not to be too blunt, but that sort of thing is responsible for half or more of the pants on head stupid that comes out of RL politicians too.
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2868
|
Posted - 2015.05.06 18:45:20 -
[122] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Suggest something to enhance PvE, not limit it. If anything CCP wants people to log in, not provide incentives to log out. Enhancing PvE won't change the problem that those who grind 10 hours of "enhanced" PvE on 10 accounts get 100x more ISK than those who spend 1 hour on 1 account. CCP wants you to do 2 things: - pay them subscription money - provide content for other players A grinder drives out casual, subscribing PvE players and provide content to nobody as he is running an optimized farm that doesn't worth ganking and does no PvP.
They are two separate issues. Note the word issues because I'm still waiting on the problem with having a small subset of players who can grind for 10 hours a day day-in-day-out.
As I noted, if such players drive up the price of PLEX that means the "lifer" can then use the fact he has a "life" and buy a PLEX and sell it to a "no lifer" and get a nice amount of isk.
Further, if there IS a problem, and I think you need to come up with more than, "He has lots of isk". There are two problems with this. First, it isn't clear how much of an advantage having lots of isk conveys. Second, lots of players have vast ISK holdings. If having a super fat wallet is the problem, then that suggests one possible solution is income redistribution.
Additionally, if the problem is the improved efficiency in accumulating wealth and resources due to things like ISBoxer, then an alternate and more elegant solution is to simply ban things like ISBoxer outright.
As for the claim that ISBoxer drives out casual players, on what are you basing this? As for ganking an ISBoxer...trust me there are pilots in this game that will gank just about anything. So you need more than statements.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1441
|
Posted - 2015.05.06 20:59:58 -
[123] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Suggest something to enhance PvE, not limit it. If anything CCP wants people to log in, not provide incentives to log out. Enhancing PvE won't change the problem that those who grind 10 hours of "enhanced" PvE on 10 accounts get 100x more ISK than those who spend 1 hour on 1 account. CCP wants you to do 2 things: - pay them subscription money - provide content for other players A grinder drives out casual, subscribing PvE players and provide content to nobody as he is running an optimized farm that doesn't worth ganking and does no PvP. No life grinders and casual PvE players do the same thing save the grinders do it longer creating greater opportunity, and in the case of multiboxers more targets, to be "content." If that's the only metric those players are better for the game than casual, single account PvE players.
Also how does the grinder drive out the casual, and in what way is he less desirable to gank? |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
15840
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 04:25:50 -
[124] - Quote
Hopelesshobo wrote:
There are NPC market orders that make up price ceilings in the game. When a player interacts with an NPC it is PVE. If someone exchanges a currency for a hard asset or vice versa, then it is trading. Therefore trading can be PVE.
When was the last time you saw an NPC selling a tengu?
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X
229
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 05:28:55 -
[125] - Quote
So if you and I have the same job and you work one hour a day and I work 10 we should make just about the same amount of money?
If this sounds stupid then please re-read your post.
Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2743
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 06:10:32 -
[126] - Quote
Extending this idea . . . your market orders would only be active for a portion of the day, after all, market is a form of play as well.
no
people can pvp dor hours on end, it is just the transport that has fatigue and said transport fatigue hurts miners and haulers just as much as the pvpers so there is no need to add a fairness limit.
no, just no
m
Mike Azariah Gö¼GöÇGöÇGö¼n++ ¯|(pâä)/¯
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1167
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 07:13:50 -
[127] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Extending this idea . . . your market orders would only be active for a portion of the day, after all, market is a form of play as well.
No no no no, you see that would affect the OP and thus violates F&ID shiptoasting Rule #2: Your half baked idea cannot affect your gameplay style, just everyone elses.
The whole thing is a cornucopia of fail, a trainwreck of unbelievable proportion and yes, straight up trolling in my book because the entire concept is a preposterous oxymoron and anyone with an ounce of sense can see this.
"We have to protect newbies" ... by implementing the single greatest pressure imaginable on the isk/hour ratio thus placing the unassailable advantage in the hands of vets everywhere. Does OP think a newbro is going to compete in a two hour window with guys running WH escalations? Protip: Never going to happen in this lifetime, or the next. So said newbro can currently play a bit linger to make some scratch, but the proposal to "help" them blocks them from even this crushing and destroying their ability to compete at any level.
My cat could tell you this is a poster child for Malcanis Law. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1130
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 09:05:57 -
[128] - Quote
Another point here...this would actually punish those who perform diverse activities in the game. I log in at work, run PI, run exploration, manufacture all sorts of stuff, haul my stuff around, buy and sell etc etc.Basically everything other than PvP as I don't particularly like it. Under this proposal I would actually be punished for having more diverse activities than simply missioning as each that fell into the OP definition of punishable PvE would have a cumulative affect on my allowed time on each of them.
Then to top it all off if I get home at night and find I have some time free and choose to head into lo/null for some better exploration I get slapped for having pootled around in the day providing stuff to the market and buying/selling stuff from others thus promoting them being in space doing stuff too.
Someone please link the every known language 'no' set... |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1167
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 09:43:38 -
[129] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Someone please link the every known language 'no' set...
Ask and you shall receive (With some bold):
No Nej +ä+º jo geen +++¦ he+º bir ez aª¿aª+ ne -+-¦ Dili neniu ei hindi aucun non -î-ç+¦ ßâÉßâáßâÉßâáßâÿßâí a¬òa½ïa¬ê Pa gen Ba +£+É añ¿añ¦aÑÇañé tsis mba tidak Uimh Nei püäpüäpüê Ana +º+Ö+Ö+ƒ a¦ça¦¦a¦ìa¦¦ ßPé߃ÆßPÿßP¦ßPô µùá täí 8òädïê ne a¦Üa+ìa+êa¦ía¦¦ N-ô kwete Nru añ¿añ+añ¦aÑÇ |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1130
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 09:57:41 -
[130] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Someone please link the every known language 'no' set... Ask and you shall receive (With some bold): No Nej +ä+º jo geen +++¦ he+º bir ez aª¿aª+ ne -+-¦ Dili neniu ei hindi aucun non -î-ç+¦ ßâÉßâáßâÉßâáßâÿßâí a¬òa½ïa¬ê Pa gen Ba +£+É añ¿añ¦aÑÇañé tsis mba tidak Uimh Nei püäpüäpüê Ana +º+Ö+Ö+ƒ a¦ça¦¦a¦ìa¦¦ ßPé߃ÆßPÿßP¦ßPô µùá täí 8òädïê ne a¦Üa+ìa+êa¦ía¦¦ N-ô kwete Nru añ¿añ+añ¦aÑÇ
This should be added as a sticky at the top so that it can be easily linked :D |
|
Felix Judge
Gallente Rebels Inc. Villore Accords
17
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 15:52:08 -
[131] - Quote
James Baboli wrote:Directly punishes newbies who everything about the game is still cool and shiny by limiting their ability to make isk.. Newbies don't do the same thing for hours on end.
|
Felix Judge
Gallente Rebels Inc. Villore Accords
17
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 15:55:44 -
[132] - Quote
Basil Pupkin wrote:[...]I don't like bots either, and it hits them harder than it hits the players.[...] Nicely sums it up.
And no-one except a botter can not be in favour of this.
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1131
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 16:04:36 -
[133] - Quote
Felix Judge wrote:James Baboli wrote:Directly punishes newbies who everything about the game is still cool and shiny by limiting their ability to make isk.. Newbies don't do the same thing for hours on end.
I did as I mined at work, now I explore at work :D
This wouldn't just hit someone doing the same thing though, it would hit anyone doing any of the multiple things that constitute PvE in the OP. So as previously mentioned this would affect me (definitely not a bot) for simply enjoying many parts of the game in many ways at different parts of the day depending on the time and level of concentration I have available. Limiting anyone's playstyle is a bad idea. |
Felix Judge
Gallente Rebels Inc. Villore Accords
18
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 16:12:31 -
[134] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:PVE Fatigue means mineral streams begin to slow down T1 prices go up, Explorers do not hack as many cans making invention prices go up, players would soon be quitting because everything gets too expensive to use[...]
Please think it through: what you do as a real player (as opposed to as a bot or bot-like entity) and what you get from it (the minerals you mine, the modules you loot etc. etc.) also gets more valuable, and this is the crucial point: even more so than for the bots.
More players would stay because their time reaps them better rewards as it does now where they have to compete with bots or bot-likes. |
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
624
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 16:14:42 -
[135] - Quote
Felix Judge wrote:Basil Pupkin wrote:[...]I don't like bots either, and it hits them harder than it hits the players.[...] Nicely sums it up. And no-one except a botter can not be in favour of this. Check in on an incursion community some time. Almost every FC, and most of the regular pilots, will have a time when they went 4+ hours in a single run, and some will do it multiple days a week, for fun, because they are easy isk once you know how to run them safely.
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
625
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 16:23:04 -
[136] - Quote
Felix Judge wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:PVE Fatigue means mineral streams begin to slow down T1 prices go up, Explorers do not hack as many cans making invention prices go up, players would soon be quitting because everything gets too expensive to use[...] Please think it through: what you do as a real player (as opposed to as a bot or bot-like entity) and what you get from it (the minerals you mine, the modules you loot etc. etc.) also gets more valuable, and this is the crucial point: even more so than for the bots. More players would stay because their time reaps them better rewards as it does now where they have to compete with bots or bot-likes. Their income also goes down, while prices go up, causing a classical case of hyperinflationary spiral which leads to a dead economy.
Assets, i.e. things you can fly or fit, are potatoes.
If there are fewer potatoes being grown, they become more valuable. If less money is being generated, then those more valuable potatoes end up worth much more. To get a potato now costs more time investment, as there are fewer of them. If you have money stored up before it becomes harder to get, you can continue to treat potatoes as before, right until you can't afford to eat them, or there are no more potatoes at any price. Thus those with a fat stack can continue to engage anything that moves, but players without it must weigh the risk of their potato going away vs. the time it requires to obtain another potato.
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
Felix Judge
Gallente Rebels Inc. Villore Accords
18
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 16:24:05 -
[137] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Felix Judge wrote:James Baboli wrote:Directly punishes newbies who everything about the game is still cool and shiny by limiting their ability to make isk.. Newbies don't do the same thing for hours on end. I did as I mined at work, now I explore at work :D This wouldn't just hit someone doing the same thing though, it would hit anyone doing any of the multiple things that constitute PvE in the OP. So as previously mentioned this would affect me (definitely not a bot) for simply enjoying many parts of the game in many ways at different parts of the day depending on the time and level of concentration I have available. Limiting anyone's playstyle is a bad idea. If you mined at work, you were afk-mining, or not working. If you were exploring at work, you were not working. But I admit you said you were "at work", not that you were working. o7
Now to the point: When different activities are affected by different timers or different fatigues, this would affect a real player much less than a bot or bot-like.
And something that affects everyone in the same way is not limiting any more or less than something you cannot do in the first place: CCP does not let you build a titan with 1 Tritanium? A limit! CCP makes you run a mining laser for 10 minutes instead of 5? A limit! CCP demands you to have a gun fitted to your ship to be able to shoot? A limit! So what? No advantage or disadvantage to you because it is the same for everyone else.
The point is that what OP suggests is something that limits bots more than real players. And this actually enhances real players' rewards. And thus gives them less limitations, or more freedom than to people running bots. |
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
626
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 16:30:42 -
[138] - Quote
Felix Judge wrote: The point is that what OP suggests is something that limits bots more than real players. And this actually enhances real players' rewards. And thus gives them less limitations, or more freedom than to people running bots.
How many bots do you think are in this game? Why should "bot-likes" be penalized? How does limiting what can be done by everyone as seperate timers not hurt newbies disproportionately, as they do not have anything like the SP to effectively do all the things that would need to be separated for it to make sense for PVE only fatigue? How does a single fatigue timer for PVE not disproportionately hurt newbies, as they don't have the isk or SP for the pimpest boats to make the most isk/hr before their fatigue sets in, thus soft-capping them to a much lower income even with more effort? Conversely, how does this limit improve the game for anyone? How do we prevent an economic collapse due to stagflation?
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
Felix Judge
Gallente Rebels Inc. Villore Accords
18
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 16:39:07 -
[139] - Quote
James Baboli wrote:[...]Their income also goes down, In this you err, friend. Their income goes up, because what they harvest becomes more valuable because fewer botters flood the market.
Your own example:
James Baboli wrote:while prices go up, causing a classical case of hyperinflationary spiral which leads to a dead economy.
Assets, i.e. things you can fly or fit, are potatoes.
If there are fewer potatoes being grown, they become more valuable. If less money is being generated, then those more valuable potatoes end up worth much more. To get a potato now costs more time investment, as there are fewer of them. If you have money stored up before it becomes harder to get, you can continue to treat potatoes as before, right until you can't afford to eat them, or there are no more potatoes at any price. Thus those with a fat stack can continue to engage anything that moves, but players without it must weigh the risk of their potato going away vs. the time it requires to obtain another potato. Real players play, say, 4 hrs / day and grow, say 10 potatoes in this time, so 10 potatoes per day. Botters play 20 hours a day and thus grow 50 potatoes a day (and this is only per account.). So there are 60 potatoes harvested each day. Each potatoe is worth 1/60 = 1,6667% of what the market is willing to spend on potatoes. A real player gets 10 x 1,667% = 16,67% of what the market is willing to spend on potatoes. With what OP suggests, real player will still grow 10 potatoes, or maybe 9, being slightly affected by the fatigue as well. Botters being hit harder by fatigue because they accumulate more of it, now cannot grow 45 potatoes, but only 41 (or even less). So now there are 50 potatoes grown each day. Each potatoe is worth 2% of what the market is willing to spend on potatoes. The real player thus can now receive 9 x 2% = 18%. His income has increased. |
Felix Judge
Gallente Rebels Inc. Villore Accords
18
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 16:46:11 -
[140] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:[...]it just limits the boring grindfest and frustrates players.[...] Please re-read that. |
|
Felix Judge
Gallente Rebels Inc. Villore Accords
18
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 16:59:40 -
[141] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Gevlon Goblin wrote:EVE should reward the player being better and not letting his client run longer.
[...]Simply by virtue of the fact that I started this game almost 8 years ago I play better than any new player can ever hope. In a few minutes I'll earn far, far more than a new player. The new players will be much more likely to be impacted by this than I.[...] You are comparing the wrong things. An experienced player will alway be able to earn more ISK, or quicker, than a newbie. No surprise here.
The question that OP asks is: Should a new account that runs 20+ hrs a day (and thus is likely a bot) earn 5 times more than a new account that runs 4 hrs a day, or should it earn, say, only 3-4 times as much? Should an 8-year-account that runs 20 hrs/day (and thus is likely a very old bot) earn 5 times more than an 8-year account that runs 4 hrs/day, or should it earn only, say, 3-4 times as much?
If the return on time diminishes with more time spent, than human players - who cannot compete with bots in grinding ISK - get relatively more from their time than they do now. Which would increase player satisfaction of the majority of players that do not run bots. I.e. especially of newer players. Higher player satisfaction of newer player: higher new player retention rates.
|
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
626
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 17:03:57 -
[142] - Quote
Felix Judge wrote: With what OP suggests, real player will still grow 10 potatoes, or maybe 9, being slightly affected by the fatigue as well. Botters being hit harder by fatigue because they accumulate more of it, now cannot grow 45 potatoes, but only 41 (or even less). So now there are 50 potatoes grown each day. Each potatoe is worth 2% of what the market is willing to spend on potatoes. The real player thus can now receive 9 x 2% = 18%. His income has increased.
Except most players don't grow potatoes in isolation. They receive cash for services, and miners, most of whom are either super-casual or fanatically hardcore, mine minerals. Other players then take those minerals and craft potatoes. They then put up potatoes at the best price they can get, or what they figure is reasonable considering their costs for minerals and their effort.
Casuals mine occasionally, usually when bored, and probably without actually doing the math or work of getting boosts and hauling set up to maximize efficiency. They do not lose income based on fatigue, and if they grow potatoes, they grow few or small potatoes, or buy the minerals to feed into their potatoes.
Fanatical miners provide a large chunk of the minerals, often while semi-AFK. While I do not have stats, would be surprised if it is less than 40% from these hardcores, who you describe as "bot-like" or acuse of actual botting, who usually have multiple accounts set up to run boosts, hauling and mining. They are more likely capable of growing whole potatoes by themselves, and some do, making the market less of a factor in their costs. These people lose real income from fatigue, but retain high relative income to the less dedicated and skilled miners.
Now, Joe mission runner and Jimmy Ratter need new ships, because CCP just nerf-batted their current potatoes too hard, and so now their current potatoes aren't useful. They have isk, and each needs a potato. Joe mission runner is a semi-AFK, capstable FOF missile kinda guy, and makes 40m/hr. Jimmy Ratter runs a shiny pwnmobile through belts and sites and cherry picks faction spawns and knows how to chain them, so he makes 120m/hr.
The new potato at the top of the pile costs 140m, and the toys to make it work right cost another 10.
Joe needs to run for almost 4 hours to afford this new potato, but is hit with fatigue after 2, so needs to either dock up in shame, new potato still on the shelf, or power through and take 5 hours to get the potato, ship getting less and less nice, and game getting more frustrating all the while. Joe has lost real, and relative income for the sole reason of fatigue.
Jimmy, on the other hand, quickly makes his 120m, and realizes that he got one particularly nice potato seed, so when his last tick ends, he takes the shiny potato seed and sells it, and then heads to the potato store @ 4-4, and gets himself a new potato, which is still the lowest buy order, because Joe is still stuck trying to kill a frigate with FoFs for the last 30 minutes because his fatigue has lowered his majestic potatoes DPS to less than that of a well rested and fit frigate. Jimmy has not lost much real income and has gained relative income.
Is this what you want, or is this some war on actual bots carried out in the most asinine manner possible?
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
Felix Judge
Gallente Rebels Inc. Villore Accords
18
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 17:13:27 -
[143] - Quote
Donnachadh wrote:[...]-1 I spend most of my time working with new players which means I spend most of my game time flying lvl 4 missions to boost THEIR standings and ISK earning abilities and this idea would put a severe limitation on my ability to do that. How does this help the game overall?[...] You could still do that as much. You would just earn less ISK with it, but according to what you write, that is not what you intend to do.
The new players you are helping would still earn lots of ISK, so OPs proposal does not interfere with your altruistic activities either. (The new players would only earn less (and less standing?) if they did it all day long, too.)
Plus, neither you nor the new player you intend to help can ever compete with afk-ratters, afk-miners, or bots. Restricting the latters' income would help you and the new player.
|
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
626
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 17:16:11 -
[144] - Quote
Felix Judge wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Gevlon Goblin wrote:EVE should reward the player being better and not letting his client run longer.
[...]Simply by virtue of the fact that I started this game almost 8 years ago I play better than any new player can ever hope. In a few minutes I'll earn far, far more than a new player. The new players will be much more likely to be impacted by this than I.[...] You are comparing the wrong things. An experienced player will alway be able to earn more ISK, or quicker, than a newbie. No surprise here. The question that OP asks is: Should a new account that runs 20+ hrs a day (and thus is likely a bot) earn 5 times more than a new account that runs 4 hrs a day, or should it earn, say, only 3-4 times as much? Should an 8-year-account that runs 20 hrs/day (and thus is likely a very old bot) earn 5 times more than an 8-year account that runs 4 hrs/day, or should it earn only, say, 3-4 times as much? If the return on time diminishes with more time spent, than human players - who cannot compete with bots in grinding ISK - get relatively more from their time than they do now. Which would increase player satisfaction of the majority of players that do not run bots. I.e. especially of newer players. Higher player satisfaction of newer player: higher new player retention rates. Again, how many bots do you think there are, relative to real players? I haven't seen anything I suspected was a bot in about 3 months, and then I was pretty sure it was purely to keep his mining fleet arrayed all pretty-like.
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
Angrod Losshelin
Viziam Amarr Empire
118
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 17:21:05 -
[145] - Quote
TLDR lets break eve!
Check out my Podcast!
My Blog!
|
Felix Judge
Gallente Rebels Inc. Villore Accords
18
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 17:22:57 -
[146] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:[...] This idea would be tantamount to limiting the amount of time they can engage in the aspects of the sandbox they enjoy. Players like myself would be impacted severely as I invent, haul, manufacture, occasionally mine, run explo sites and combat anoms, manage PI and market orders. [...]
It is a fatigue, not a lock-out. One gets less from it / time unit. Diminishing returns. One can still do it all day long.
And since the ones who do it longest are bots, this hurts bots most. And real players less, thus improving their reward against bots.
Also, each activity would have a seperate fatigue counter. Doing PI does not diminish your ratting returns, going on an exploration spree lets you recover from mining fatigue etc. |
Felix Judge
Gallente Rebels Inc. Villore Accords
18
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 17:40:36 -
[147] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:[...] And what if a guy wants to mine for 2 or three hours? What if he wants to run missions with his corp for a few hours while chatting on coms
Do you even read your own posts, Gevlon? And who the **** are you to tell other players what they can and can't do in game?
Did you even read his post that you are complaining about? That guy who wants to mine for 3 hours can do so. The only thing that happens will be he earns most in the first hour, a little less in the second, even less in the third - but still a lot more/hour than a bot that is doing it 23/7.
He is not trying to tell other players what to do, he is suggesting that those who do NOT really play it earn less/hour. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1167
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 17:56:32 -
[148] - Quote
Felix Judge wrote:The question that OP asks is: Should a new account that runs 20+ hrs a day (and thus is likely a bot) earn 5 times more than a new account that runs 4 hrs a day
Yes because if it is a bot, CCP can take action. Otherwise, you don't get to tell people how they spend their free time.
Felix Judge wrote:If the return on time diminishes with more time spent, than human players - who cannot compete with bots in grinding ISK - get relatively more from their time than they do now. Which would increase player satisfaction of the majority of players that do not run bots. I.e. especially of newer players. Higher player satisfaction of newer player: higher new player retention rates.
People bot low end PvE activities. I, like most of the vets, don't do such pissant isk gathering. We indulge in a high level of isk making, one newbies or bots could never match in isk/hour stakes.
I repeat - show me a noob that is going to compete with high end PvE activities in an isk/hour and I'll show you a liar. High end PvE content requires high end skills, experience, cannot realistically be botted and can easily make tens of billions a week. All this crapfest does is ensure that noobs can never again purchase anything and the vets are unaffected. Shocker.
Even setting that aside, noob has a frigate. He spends two hours doing level 1 missions. I have a pimped marauder and I spend two hours hammering level 4s. Who makes more isk? Does the weath gap decrease, or increase?
Add the likelihood of a vet having alts and a noob not so should they so desire they can double down their income.
The noob is literally punished in every conceivable way.
Said noob quickly realises it's farmville with limits on what you can realistically do in a play session, logs off and never looks back.
Explain how this doensn't violate Malcanis's law and furthermore demonstrate with proof that bots are pricing noobs out the game and not, in fact, keeping T1 ship costs so low as to help newbies, who can sell drops/exploration content for isk.
And talking of bots/hardcore players, explain how someone who can play a few hours a day can compete in the market with these guys. Oh that's right they can't, but like all good nerf requests, OP doesn't want it affecting his part of the game as that is sacrosanct. |
Felix Judge
Gallente Rebels Inc. Villore Accords
18
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 18:16:38 -
[149] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:[...] My point is that your suggestion will actively stop players from performing their preferred activities. Whether bots can be more successful is irrelevant to whether a player chooses to perform a task or not. [...] Bots de-value what you get from your preferred activity. And since many players choose their activities by ISK/hour (or if they think it is good money), of course the success of bots is relevant to what players do. If the bots' success that compete with you does not stop you from a certain activity, then OP's idea will stop you even less.
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: For example I and many others I know will mine whilst at work. We are ATK and depending on who is behind us will have the window open or at least fly properly tanked procs/skiffs. This gives a continued supply of minerals to markets and puts targets in space. It's up to other players to disrupt that, not some crappy mechanic. Jump fatigue is different in this sense as there was very little (if anything) that anyone could do to interfere with a massive fleet jumping stupid distances. 1.) Working OR playing. 2.) "Properly tanked procs/skiffs" - I presume in high sec - with the game window closed is afk-mining or semi-afk-mining. No wonder you are against the proposal that hinders afk-playstyles in favour of active playstyles. :) And pray your boss never finds out ("is behind you" at the wrong time), or will have no need to close that window in the future while running the game client, because it may well be on your computer at home during work hours, too. |
Felix Judge
Gallente Rebels Inc. Villore Accords
18
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 18:27:59 -
[150] - Quote
James Baboli wrote:Reaver Glitterstim wrote:I'm all for a rest mechanic similar to WoW, perhaps affecting damage. A tired capsuleer should take some penalties. Nobody needs to play 16-23.5 hours per day, every day. A rest mechanic penalizing people who play more than 112 hours in a week (sliding window) will only harm botters and people who really should get more sleep. Now, explain why this is good for anyone. That it only harms people who are playing for a marathon session is insufficient reason to implement a feature if there is no clear cut upside anywhere. It only harms no-lifers, but some of the best times I've had in eve have come from marathon fleets, in one case 53 hours of near continuous play. This was a special case (long weekend, girlfriends out of town, a couple other eve players co-located in meatspace) but it was still one of the best times I have had in eve.
112 hours / week.
53-hour marathon.
|
|
Felix Judge
Gallente Rebels Inc. Villore Accords
18
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 18:30:05 -
[151] - Quote
Hopelesshobo wrote:Reaver Glitterstim wrote:I'm all for a rest mechanic similar to WoW, perhaps affecting damage. A tired capsuleer should take some penalties. Nobody needs to play 16-23.5 hours per day, every day. A rest mechanic penalizing people who play more than 112 hours in a week (sliding window) will only harm botters and people who really should get more sleep. A tired capsuleer does take penalties. The penalties include.... -Lower risk management (I can take on 4 guys at once) -Higher chances of making a mistake (Did I just click jump to or bridge to?) -Lower reaction time (Hey guys that tornado has me....nevermind he alphad me) -Not notice something important (How did I end up in low/nulsec? I should have gotten that low/nulsec warning box to pop up) There are many more. So if anything, by encouraging people to turn off the game and get some sleep or go outside, you are encouraging people to not do as many things that will get them killed.
Bots do not tire.
|
Felix Judge
Gallente Rebels Inc. Villore Accords
18
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 18:42:44 -
[152] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:[...]Suggest something to enhance PvE, not limit it. If anything CCP wants people to log in, not provide incentives to log out. Since actual players get relatively more from it, the suggestion a.) enhances PLAYED PvE (over botted or grinded PvE), and will b) thus make more people stay logged in when they see that what they earn by PvE actually buys them something worth their time. |
Felix Judge
Gallente Rebels Inc. Villore Accords
18
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 18:50:59 -
[153] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:So if you and I have the same job and you work one hour a day and I work 10 we should make just about the same amount of money?
If this sounds stupid then please re-read your post. You have not read it. OP says that if you "work" more than 10 hours each day (which means you are probably not working, but something else is happening), then you will get less for whatever it is you are doing in those >10 hours. |
Felix Judge
Gallente Rebels Inc. Villore Accords
18
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 19:12:27 -
[154] - Quote
James Baboli wrote:[...] Joe mission runner is a semi-AFK, capstable FOF missile kinda guy, and makes 40m/hr. Jimmy Ratter runs a shiny pwnmobile through belts and sites and cherry picks faction spawns and knows how to chain them, so he makes 120m/hr.
The new potato at the top of the pile costs 140m, and the toys to make it work right cost another 10.
Joe needs to run for almost 4 hours to afford this new potato, but is hit with fatigue after 2, so needs to either dock up in shame, new potato still on the shelf, or power through and take 5 hours to get the potato, [...] Joe has lost real, and relative income for the sole reason of fatigue. Yes, because he is the afk-"playing" one. Working as intended. Only your example is also very extreme, as fatigue already kicks in after two hours. OP's suggestion is that fatigue starts to impact after, what, 50 hours/week or so.
James Baboli wrote:Jimmy, on the other hand, quickly makes his 120m, and realizes that he got one particularly nice potato seed, so when his last tick ends, he takes the shiny potato seed and sells it, and then heads to the potato store @ 4-4, and gets himself a new potato, which is still the lowest buy order, because Joe is still stuck trying to kill a frigate with FoFs for the last 30 minutes because his afk-self-induced James Baboli wrote: fatigue has lowered his majestic potatoes DPS to less than that of a well rested and fit frigate. Jimmy has not lost much real income and has gained relative income. Because he is actively playing. Again, working as intended! \o/
James Baboli wrote:Is this what you want, or is this some war on actual bots [...] Both.
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1132
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 19:12:32 -
[155] - Quote
Felix Judge wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:[...] My point is that your suggestion will actively stop players from performing their preferred activities. Whether bots can be more successful is irrelevant to whether a player chooses to perform a task or not. [...] Bots de-value what you get from your preferred activity. And since many players choose their activities by ISK/hour (or if they think it is good money), of course the success of bots is relevant to what players do. If the bots' success that compete with you does not stop you from a certain activity, then OP's idea will stop you even less. Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: For example I and many others I know will mine whilst at work. We are ATK and depending on who is behind us will have the window open or at least fly properly tanked procs/skiffs. This gives a continued supply of minerals to markets and puts targets in space. It's up to other players to disrupt that, not some crappy mechanic. Jump fatigue is different in this sense as there was very little (if anything) that anyone could do to interfere with a massive fleet jumping stupid distances. 1.) Working OR playing. 2.) "Properly tanked procs/skiffs" - I presume in high sec - with the game window closed is afk-mining or semi-afk-mining. No wonder you are against the proposal that hinders afk-playstyles in favour of active playstyles. :) And pray your boss never finds out ("is behind you" at the wrong time), or will have no need to close that window in the future while running the game client, because it may well be on your computer at home during work hours, too.
My work means I regularly have to wait for scripts to run, builds to complete etc etc. It's just the nature of the work and I most certainly wouldn't be playing if it interfered with what I do! When I mined I could easily monitor 2 screens at once, I do it all the time with multiple running scripts and builds so mining alongside was a breeze.
My point is that I am logged in even if I'm not actively doing something. How would the servers know the difference? How would they track how long I actually played or was just following corp/friend chat? If the server could tell who was botting or not I think that would already be implemented. Any implementation of the OP punishes those who choose to have a marathon Eve run for whatever their reason and it isn't up to CCP to punish players for doing so.
Example: I'm setting up a new PI planet, I'm doing so in the 5 minute waits whilst scripts run but there are times where I leave my computer open on the PI window whilst I do more actual work (some people read news etc whilst stuff runs, I do PI). How does the server time how long I'm doing PI for? Measure the length of time the window is open for? Measure how much I move the mouse? Measure the number of clicks (Already a punishment in itself with PI...)? Too many variables and a potentially large increase in server side load. It isn't a workable idea in my opinion. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1132
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 19:13:08 -
[156] - Quote
odd double post... |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1168
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 19:38:06 -
[157] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Example: I'm setting up a new PI planet, I'm doing so in the 5 minute waits whilst scripts run but there are times where I leave my computer open on the PI window whilst I do more actual work (some people read news etc whilst stuff runs, I do PI). How does the server time how long I'm doing PI for?
This is another good reason it's a stupid idea. The very notion PI can be botted/"hardcored" is like suggesting the same for the skill queue. |
Felix Judge
Gallente Rebels Inc. Villore Accords
18
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 19:49:06 -
[158] - Quote
afkalt wrote:People bot low end PvE activities. I, like most of the vets, don't do such pissant isk gathering. We indulge in a high level of isk making, one newbies or bots could never match in isk/hour stakes.
I repeat - show me a noob that is going to compete with high end PvE activities in an isk/hour and I'll show you a liar. High end PvE content requires high end skills, experience, cannot realistically be botted and can easily make tens of billions a week. [...] the vets are unaffected. Shocker.
[...]
Said noob quickly realises it's farmville with limits on what you can realistically do in a play session, logs off and never looks back.
Explain how this doensn't violate Malcanis's law and furthermore demonstrate with proof that bots are pricing noobs out the game and not, in fact, keeping T1 ship costs so low as to help newbies, who can sell drops/exploration content for isk. [...]
You did yourself, see above: a) Malcanis law: You wrote yourself that Vets are unaffected. For Malcanis' law to be fulfilled, Newbies would have to be adversely affected. Since bots are affected adversely, and newbs who do not play ridicilous amounts of time (remember the weekly buffer OP suggests, too) are not, and bots do low-end PvE activities and thus are the ones who are competing with what newbies do, and thus the newbies' competitors are adversely affected, and thus the newbies are positively affected, while the vets - who do not compete with the bots and thus neither with the newbies - are unaffected, Malcanis' law is not fulfilled. b) Demanding proof that is difficult to obtain from someone so that he may prove his point is a well-known kill-phrase technique and I am not responding to it. Instead I am answering with logic: When bots can out-compete newbies on almost anything that newbies typically do, simply because they can do it a lot longer, than it is obvious that bots are bad for newbies and their income and their wealth, and thus their ability to purchase stuff. Stuff that would maybe be more expensive, but because of higher income relatively better accessible. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1168
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 20:11:18 -
[159] - Quote
Of course it is fulfilled. The value of EXISTING liquid isk and assets increases massively.
People sitting on bil/trillions are worth even more overnight.
Quote: "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of 'new players', that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
Try harder.
You're the one arguing for game mechanics to hurt something that is against the EULA, not me. The onus is on you to prove that real players should suffer for those in violation of said EULA.
I see you're ignoring the market. Hi Gevlon. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2872
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 20:17:09 -
[160] - Quote
Felix Judge wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:[...] And what if a guy wants to mine for 2 or three hours? What if he wants to run missions with his corp for a few hours while chatting on coms
Do you even read your own posts, Gevlon? And who the **** are you to tell other players what they can and can't do in game?
Did you even read his post that you are complaining about? That guy who wants to mine for 3 hours can do so. The only thing that happens will be he earns most in the first hour, a little less in the second, even less in the third, and only if he has already used up his considerable buffer of un-fatigued playtime - and still a lot more/hour than a bot that is doing it 23/7. He is not trying to tell other players what to do, he is suggesting that those who do NOT really play it earn less/hour.
Obviously a player who cannot fly a ship with a jump drive.....
Fatigue has to be exponential in its application for it to be truly effective like Gevlon is saying. He wants to make it so if a player is going to rat in 4 ishtars for 10 hours that is no longer feasible. At most, it would be something like maybe 2 at the most. After that the fatigue would become very burdensome so you might as well log off and wait hours for it to dissipate
And anyone who justifies nerfing actual play time for players with the argument, "It will hurt bots more" is just being...well I'd prefer it ISD did not remove this post, so lets just say you are very special. The reason is we don't want bots and we want human players. Going after the bots by also going after the players is a horrible strategy. And I'm pretty sure a player logged in for long periods of time and who is also active during that time...is already on Team Security's radar.
And perhaps you should re-read the OP again. There would be, at least in some instances lock outs.
Quote:After a high fatigue you are also locked out of PI interface.
And the OP does NOT say each form of PvE gets its own fatigue measure.
Quote:Let's calibrate the fatigue to kick in after 1 hour/day farming - which is more than enough for a casual player if we want him to do other things than farming!
Note the presumptive arrogance of that line, "...if we want him to do other things than farming...." Who is Gevlon or any other player to dictate what aspects of the game another player can engage in? It is a freaking sandbox game. You get in the sandbox and....do what you like. Gevlon is basically saying that people who want to PvE for "too long" are sandboxing wrong. He thinks he knows how to make the game better for them and he'll make them play the way he thinks they should.
I also like how you completely refuse to answer the point about Malcanis' Law that I and afkalt have brought up.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2872
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 20:21:27 -
[161] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Example: I'm setting up a new PI planet, I'm doing so in the 5 minute waits whilst scripts run but there are times where I leave my computer open on the PI window whilst I do more actual work (some people read news etc whilst stuff runs, I do PI). How does the server time how long I'm doing PI for? This is another good reason it's a stupid idea. The very notion PI can be botted/"hardcored" is like suggesting the same for the skill queue.
True. My goal with PI...get in and get out. Restart planets as fast as possible. Worst part is when I have to empty the POCOs. I'll even just fly through my PI systems moving stuff off planet to the POCO until that gets filled. In short, I'm already doing what the OP wants...at least for PI.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1442
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 20:32:00 -
[162] - Quote
Felix Judge wrote:afkalt wrote:People bot low end PvE activities. I, like most of the vets, don't do such pissant isk gathering. We indulge in a high level of isk making, one newbies or bots could never match in isk/hour stakes.
I repeat - show me a noob that is going to compete with high end PvE activities in an isk/hour and I'll show you a liar. High end PvE content requires high end skills, experience, cannot realistically be botted and can easily make tens of billions a week. [...] the vets are unaffected. Shocker.
[...]
Said noob quickly realises it's farmville with limits on what you can realistically do in a play session, logs off and never looks back.
Explain how this doensn't violate Malcanis's law and furthermore demonstrate with proof that bots are pricing noobs out the game and not, in fact, keeping T1 ship costs so low as to help newbies, who can sell drops/exploration content for isk. [...] You did yourself, see above: a) Malcanis law: You wrote yourself that Vets are unaffected. For Malcanis' law to be fulfilled, Newbies would have to be adversely affected. Since bots are affected adversely, and newbs who do not play ridicilous amounts of time (remember the weekly buffer OP suggests, too) are not, and bots do low-end PvE activities and thus are the ones who are competing with what newbies do, and thus the newbies' competitors are adversely affected, and thus the newbies are positively affected, while the vets - who do not compete with the bots and thus neither with the newbies - are unaffected, Malcanis' law is not fulfilled. b) Demanding proof that is difficult to obtain from someone so that he may prove his point is a well-known kill-phrase technique and I am not responding to it. Instead I am answering with logic: When bots can out-compete newbies on almost anything that newbies typically do, simply because they can do it a lot longer, than it is obvious that bots are bad for newbies and their income and their wealth, and thus their ability to purchase stuff. Stuff that would maybe be more expensive, but because of higher income relatively better accessible. Actually what was demonstrated was that from a time perspective vets and new players are equally effected, thus Malcanis Law comes into full effect with the higher potential gains in that timeframe older players have compared to newer ones. It ensures that new players can't put in the extra time to try to close the gap with less active older players.
Also in the case of several activities there is no effective separation between older and newer players. The thousand LP a new player on level 1 missions makes is still in competition with the tens of thousands a level 4 runner makes at the same time. Veteran miners have access to Hulks and Orcas with max boosts to enhance mining capacity over the that of ventures and barges without boosts.
These realities hold true with or without bots. That is on top of the fact that botting creates an unfair advantage over the new and veteran alike. The only proper solution is their active banning rather than punishing legitimate players or opening holes to be gamed with personal income. Your logic is flawed because it introduces tolerance for bots, creating a minimum effort level that mandates their use since you can no longer make up the difference over time. If we simply accept that they are wrong and should be banned their performance becomes a non-factor in other considerations.
We've presented logic counter to your own thus you should be able to provide a use case where the logic holds without resorting to EULA violations. It your position really has room to stand on that shouldn't be so difficult to satisfy. Calling it a "kill-phrase" seems like a deflection from the fact that you can't justify your reasoning.
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2872
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 20:41:41 -
[163] - Quote
Felix Judge wrote:
You did yourself, see above: a) Malcanis law: You wrote yourself that Vets are unaffected. For Malcanis' law to be fulfilled, Newbies would have to be adversely affected. Since bots are affected adversely, and newbs who do not play ridicilous amounts of time (remember the weekly buffer OP suggests, too) are not, and bots do low-end PvE activities and thus are the ones who are competing with what newbies do, and thus the newbies' competitors are adversely affected, and thus the newbies are positively affected, while the vets - who do not compete with the bots and thus neither with the newbies - are unaffected, Malcanis' law is not fulfilled.
Wrong. Vets are less affected because we engage in ISK making endeavors that new players cannot usually get into. Mostly because they lack the skill points, the ISK and often times the organizational support. Most new players will make ISK one of three ways,
1. Mining--subject to PvE Fatigue. 2. Missions--subject to PvE Fatigue. 3. A combination of 1 & 2--subject to PvE fatigue.
Thus, two primary sources of new player income is nerfed right from the get go.
A veteran player on the other hand can do other things like running a reaction farm which will net him billions depending on how big he goes. A veteran player can run PI and probably stay well within the 1 hour time limit. I know I usually do when I do my PI stuff. For many new players they wont have the isk for buying PI skill books, the command centers, the hauler, the hauler skill book, and they'd have to wait for all those skills to get to a reasonable level. A veteran player could also rat in null for his allotted hour far more efficiently than the new player could run missions or rat in null. Even trading the veteran is going to have the edge. Starting with 200 million is going to mean the veteran always stays ahead of the new player baring some very, very good luck on the part of the new player. And hauling is hardly a viable income source for new players in a T1 frigate. Salvaging might work, but probably not. With PvE fatigue there will be less wrecks lying around, right? After all farming is bad and there should be less of it.
So as a veteran, I'll less affected and it isn't clear this will help the new player in that with less ISK the new player acquires skill books at a slower rate, ships and equipment at a slower rate, just about everything in the game at a slower rate.
Malcanis' Law is in full effect here.
Quote:When bots can out-compete newbies on almost anything that newbies typically do, simply because they can do it a lot longer, than it is obvious that bots are bad for newbies and their income and their wealth, and thus their ability to purchase stuff. Stuff that would maybe be more expensive, but because of higher income relatively better accessible.
Nobody is denying that bots are bad, nor would many disagree that bots impose more harm on new players either (e.g. a ratting bot is going to put more ISK into the economy and increase the rate of inflation and given the new players reduced ability to ramp up income earning this results in a net loss). But this solution is not aimed just at bots. It is aimed at all players, bots and human alike. It limits the playing time of bots and humans. And the solution to bots is not to nerf human play time to nerf bot play time, but to find the bots and ban them.
And as I said, any player logging in for 10 hours a day with 10 accounts and being active the entire time...I'm pretty sure CCP has an eye on them. I would imagine that would be part of any algorithm to find suspected bots.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2874
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 20:50:38 -
[164] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Also in the case of several activities there is no effective separation between older and newer players. The thousand LP a new player on level 1 missions makes is still in competition with the tens of thousands a level 4 runner makes at the same time. Veteran miners have access to Hulks and Orcas with max boosts to enhance mining capacity over the that of ventures and barges without boosts.
Excellent point.
Even when we put the vet and the new guy into the same activity the vet will still do far, far better. With fatigue there is no effective way for the new player to close the gap other than hoping the veteran player simple stops logging in.
On top of this the veteran can also do better with regards to salvaging his own missions. The veteran will likely have the skills to haul large amounts of loot drops to different trade hubs to maximize his ISK there. He'll have as good or better refining skills so any loot he refines he'll get better results as well. Not to mention standings and refining results.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
625
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 00:14:08 -
[165] - Quote
Felix Judge wrote:You did yourself, see above: a) Malcanis law: You wrote yourself that Vets are unaffected. For Malcanis' law to be fulfilled, Newbies would have to be adversely affected. Since bots are affected adversely, and newbs who do not play ridicilous amounts of time (remember the weekly buffer OP suggests, too) are not, and bots do low-end PvE activities and thus are the ones who are competing with what newbies do, and thus the newbies' competitors are adversely affected, and thus the newbies are positively affected, while the vets - who do not compete with the bots and thus neither with the newbies - are unaffected, Malcanis' law is not fulfilled. b) Demanding proof that is difficult to obtain from someone so that he may prove his point is a well-known kill-phrase technique and I am not responding to it. Instead I am answering with logic: When bots can out-compete newbies on almost anything that newbies typically do, simply because they can do it a lot longer, than it is obvious that bots are bad for newbies and their income and their wealth, and thus their ability to purchase stuff. Stuff that would maybe be more expensive, but because of higher income relatively better accessible.
For a: lets have pve fatigue. after an hour or two of rat killing I and noob are done.
I have several billion in the bank to now do trading. Noob won't.
I have several billion to fire up manufacturing. Noob won't.
See the trend. I have billions, billions a noob won't (barring etc to plex to plex sale ofc...a questionable use of that rl money imo here though). Now how did I get these billions? Long ago as a noob...I killed lots of rats for hours on end when I had more game time.
Could Botters/afk make more than I? Yes, I will grant this. But I had my fair chance to make my isk as well to get my start funds.
This hard cutoff not changing this. Your average botter/afk'er is a bitter. Who has their billions upon billions already. There is no great equality here. reduce the rat money, the bitter has more options with isk on hand they have now.
Which many of them do as is now. Some of the richest players I have know....did not spam rat killing pve. They make isk in the very things this idea is allowing to go un-fatigued. One I knew had no time to rat. time split between pvp and maintaining his empire and low sec pos strings. Empire pos's built stuff. Low sec was reaction pos'. His monthly operational costs for fuels and such alone was in the billions. Billions he made back with the greatest of ease. Only time he ratted was to fix sec status when motivated to. He liked being a pirate. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2876
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 01:37:22 -
[166] - Quote
Zan Shiro wrote:
See the trend. I have billions, billions a noob won't (barring etc to plex to plex sale ofc...a questionable use of that rl money imo here though). Now how did I get these billions? Long ago as a noob...I killed lots of rats for hours on end when I had more game time.
And just to reiterate again...the PLEX market...it provides a mechanism to transfer in game wealth from the 10 account/10 hour a day no lifer to the new casual player...who has a job that pays way, way more than the imputed wage of the no lifer living in his Aunt Gladys' basement.
And yeah, as a noob, I too spent lots of hours logged on....
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Felix Judge
Gallente Rebels Inc. Villore Accords
19
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 13:24:06 -
[167] - Quote
You all make some very good and valid points, some of which I have not seen before and I agree with, for example the increasing value of assets already in the game. That is indeed a fulfillment of Malcanis' law, I think.
Other arguments I still do not agree with.
I will not answer to all, I have spent too much time on this yesterday already :-)
Some thoughts after reading your comments:
* No, I am not Gevlon. Note my much better grasp (or at least usage) of the English language, for example ;-)
* I agree that if the intention is to produce an advantage for real players over bots and afk-playstyle, then limiting real players in doing something they enjoy doing for long hours is not the best approach.
* Fatigueable activites could be measured by: running a mining laser / having the NPC-interaction timer running (the one from shooting an NPC) / PI-interface clicks (while I would actually exclude PI - you can only sensibly do so much to your planets anyway, after that it becomes highly unproductive). Being logged into the game and only chatting with corpmates would actually reduce any fatigue. Oh, and since I am in FW atm: circling a capture point.
* Market activity already HAS not only a fatigue, but actually a hard limit that hits much quicker than after 50+ hours / week of doing it regularly, for all of those who are apparently oblivious of it: each character can only have 305 active buy/sell orders at the same time. Now how does that sound to all of you clamoring against limits and / or for an application to Mr. Goblin's main activity?
* My understanding of OP is this (and if OP means something else, well, then this is what I was and am arguing for): when one account is doing the same thing for more than 100 hours / week, then fatigue sets in for that single activity. It grows slowly at first, but when growing uninterrupted, it grows ever quicker. If allowed to accumulate, it makes the activity next to worthless (exponentially diminishing returns with a very low starting slope). Level of fatigue directly translates into less income from the fatigued activity. Stopping the activity, whether logged in or out, reduces fatigue gradually.
Many were saying something along the lines of "player has to stop activity xy after 2 hours". No. I am arguing on a completely different scale. Any mentally and bodily healthy person who does the same ISK-generating eve-online activity for more than 100 hours / week for more than two weeks in a row - isn't.
Even with 50 hours / week with the very same activity we are looking at a very rare (I hope!) kind of person who definitely needs an incentive to do something else.
Even a marathon weekend with friends - how many of those would one spend ONLY on actively mining, or ONLY ratting or another of those activities the whole frigging time? If you did, what would be the point of spending it with friends?
With this scale-of-relevance (100 hours / week buffer), the vast majority of players that are actively playing the game and have not become human vegetables will be completely unaffected themselves. (Simply put: no real player would ever even notice such a feature. CCP could silently implement it and whoever notices it and complains to CCP is in for a thorough scrutiny of his accounts.) And of the few real players that would be affected, CCP would actually do them a favour to give them a nudge to go give their brain some variety (in their state of mind, I actually doubt they would even notice). The only ones who will be adversely affected would be the non-human interactors. It would limit the influx of ISK and assets from them and limit the unfair advantage that those who run the bots have. And thus favour the people really, actively playing the game.
Banning bots entirely would be even better. We all know that CCP has not managed yet to do that. Next best to getting rid of a malady is to reduce the severity of its effects. OP has shown a way that would help with that.
Still +1. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1137
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 13:46:28 -
[168] - Quote
Felix Judge wrote:...points....
You missed a point, you should havestated you are not Gevlon again...just to be sure... |
Gevlon Goblin
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
420
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 14:43:49 -
[169] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:And just to reiterate again...the PLEX market...it provides a mechanism to transfer in game wealth from the 10 account/10 hour a day no lifer to the new casual player...who has a job that pays way, way more than the imputed wage of the no lifer living in his Aunt Gladys' basement. This is the very problem: currently a normal human player is more or less mandated to buy extra PLEX-es to play EVE, making the game practically pay-to-win with the bizarre twist that he isn't even paying to the developer, but he pays for the account of a no-lifer player. Why should anyone pay money to another player for the privilege of playing the game?!
While I'm not trying to stop PLEX trading (as it is necessary to somehow limit RMT) and I see no problem if some moron pays $1500 to buy a titan from a PL or Snuff Box alt, I do find it a problem if ordinary players can't make ends meet, because they are outmarketed by 10 account 10 hour/day nolifers/botters.
My blog: greedygoblin.blogspot.com
|
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1779
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 15:16:31 -
[170] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:
While I'm not trying to stop PLEX trading (as it is necessary to somehow limit RMT) and I see no problem if some moron pays $1500 to buy a titan from a PL or Snuff Box alt, I do find it a problem if ordinary players can't make ends meet, because they are outmarketed by 10 account 10 hour/day nolifers/botters.
What level of income do you think you need to "make ends meet"? |
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1137
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 15:31:56 -
[171] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:And just to reiterate again...the PLEX market...it provides a mechanism to transfer in game wealth from the 10 account/10 hour a day no lifer to the new casual player...who has a job that pays way, way more than the imputed wage of the no lifer living in his Aunt Gladys' basement. This is the very problem: currently a normal human player is more or less mandated to buy extra PLEX-es to play EVE, making the game practically pay-to-win with the bizarre twist that he isn't even paying to the developer, but he pays for the account of a no-lifer player. Why should anyone pay money to another player for the privilege of playing the game?! While I'm not trying to stop PLEX trading (as it is necessary to somehow limit RMT) and I see no problem if some moron pays $1500 to buy a titan from a PL or Snuff Box alt, I do find it a problem if ordinary players can't make ends meet, because they are outmarketed by 10 account 10 hour/day nolifers/botters.
I PLEX my account just fine and it certainly isn't from playing lots of hours per day. A 'normal' life owning player can PLEX easily once they have the player skills required. It just takes some knowledge and a bit of research. If bots are a problem then CCP need to go after the bots, not legislate player activities through mechanics. |
Iain Cariaba
1334
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 15:59:02 -
[172] - Quote
Just a couple quick question.
Does anyone else see the irony of Gevlon Goblin talking about no-life PVEers?
Secondly, who the **** do you think you are to tell me how to play my game? If I want to spend 10 hours a day doing PvE on 10 accounts that I pay for, that's my decision. When you start paying my subscription fees or providing me isk for PLEXes, then you will have a say in what I do and how I do it. Until then, please, do the entirety of New Eden a favor. Biomass all you characters and unsub all your accounts. Don't even give your stuff away, as we need the taint of goblin purged from the game entirely.
EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
I couldn't have said it better.
|
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
191
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 16:20:54 -
[173] - Quote
when running missions what will generate fatigue? if its actual time spent shooting then it should be based on how often the guns are green and this should apply to everything doesn't matter what you are shooting. So that not only the no-lifer pve gets hit but also the low-lifer gate camper takes the hit. |
Kaerakh
POS Party Low-Class
512
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 16:24:05 -
[174] - Quote
I thought the OP was a rather obvious, but amusing troll post. A month later my opinion remains unchanged. I can't comprehend why this is even 2 pages, let alone 9.
Obvious troll post is obvious guys. Can we talk about something interesting now?
Schrodinger's Hot Dropper
The Fate of Forum Alts
Guaranteed Success
|
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
627
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 18:35:55 -
[175] - Quote
Kaerakh wrote:I thought the OP was a rather obvious, but amusing troll post. A month later my opinion remains unchanged. I can't comprehend why this is even 2 pages, let alone 9.
Obvious troll post is obvious guys. Can we talk about something interesting now? But falcon stated it isn't trolling, so it must be true.
Propose we retopic this thread into what the PLAYERS in F&I consider trolling, so CCP can see why it was consistently reported for such.
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2884
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 20:15:28 -
[176] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:And just to reiterate again...the PLEX market...it provides a mechanism to transfer in game wealth from the 10 account/10 hour a day no lifer to the new casual player...who has a job that pays way, way more than the imputed wage of the no lifer living in his Aunt Gladys' basement. This is the very problem: currently a normal human player is more or less mandated to buy extra PLEX-es to play EVE, making the game practically pay-to-win with the bizarre twist that he isn't even paying to the developer, but he pays for the account of a no-lifer player. Why should anyone pay money to another player for the privilege of playing the game?! While I'm not trying to stop PLEX trading (as it is necessary to somehow limit RMT) and I see no problem if some moron pays $1500 to buy a titan from a PL or Snuff Box alt, I do find it a problem if ordinary players can't make ends meet, because they are outmarketed by 10 account 10 hour/day nolifers/botters.
Nobody is mandated to do anything. It is there if they want it. For a new casual its a pretty decent option, IMO. You get say an hour here and there, maybe a few hours on the weekend. So instead of spending a significant chunk of time grinding for ISK, the casual can turn around buy a PLEX and sell it. For 19.95 he can get 800 million isk. How many hours would that guy have to grind to get that? Lets say a character who is still pretty new? Even 10 hours would be amazing isk/hour for a new guy. And how would we value that 10 hours? Economic theory says we'd use his wage rate. If he makes 30 dollars an hour, that is $300 of grinding for less than $20. Okay, Eve is supposed to be fun, so even if we cut it down by a factor of 10 it still is a deal, $30 > $20.
Now, are programs like ISBoxer problematic? Yes. They are because they probably result in too much ISK entering the economy and too much mined materials as well. Both of these hurt the new guys more than the older guys. And, IMO, it is not good for the long term health of the game. Frankly, I think the days of programs like ISBoxer are numbered. Even without broadcasting the programs offer improvements in acquiring isk and in game assets. But the solution is not to limit play time for both humans and ISBoxers, but to simply ban/impose more limits on ISBoxer.
Let us use an analogy.
Gevlon is sitting there and sees an ISBoxer doing things, that in the end probably aren't good for the Eve economy. So he walks over and slaps the ISBoxer on the hand. Then he turns around chops off the arms and legs of the new player.
Finally, I'm no ratting expert (I do it periodically) but lets take Gevlon's suggestion....how might a no-life ISBoxer respond. How about he rats every other hour? Now he rats for 5 hours a day and has 3 accounts and needs to make at least 3 PLEX worth of ISK, right? So, some simple arithmetic tells me that he has to make at least 80 million a day. He has no life, so 2,400/30 = 80. He is ratting 5 hours a day...or about 16 million/hour. Or per account 5.333 million ISK. Seems like freaking chump change to me.
See the no life guy has....no life, right? So he has the luxury of spreading his play time out to optimize in response to fatigue. The new casual....probably not. And if our intrepid no-life ratter above can make 10.666 million/account/hour he'll have an extra 2.4 billion every month.
Some how this just looks like a horrible idea no matter how it is sliced...and when there are more obvious solutions staring us in the face which go down this horrible horrible path?
Oh wait, I know! People hate it when others point out the foolishness of their ideas and instead of admitting its a terrible idea they dig in their heels and insist, INSIST, that its actually a very good idea if everyone else would just think about it.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2884
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 20:29:43 -
[177] - Quote
Kaerakh wrote:I thought the OP was a rather obvious, but amusing troll post. A month later my opinion remains unchanged. I can't comprehend why this is even 2 pages, let alone 9.
Obvious troll post is obvious guys. Can we talk about something interesting now?
I'd suggest you send a note to ISD or open a petition.
No, seriously.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1444
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 20:49:11 -
[178] - Quote
Felix Judge wrote:* Market activity already HAS not only a fatigue, but actually a hard limit that hits much quicker than after 50+ hours / week of doing it regularly, for all of those who are apparently oblivious of it: each character can only have 305 active buy/sell orders at the same time. Now how does that sound to all of you clamoring against limits and / or for an application to Mr. Goblin's main activity? This statement is fundamentally flawed. You consider your activity hard capped by having 305 orders but my activity uncapped when as a combat PvE'er I can engage at most 13 targets at a time (max 8 weapon hardpoints + 5 drones all engaging individual targets, which is a terrible thing to do but demonstrates a point). He clearly has the advantage there and nothing prevents the use of additional characters to get around that limit. Unlike me he doesn't even have to have those characters on different accounts for them to act simultaneously. In a single account I'm capped at 13 engagements but he can have up to 915.
Felix Judge wrote:* My understanding of OP is this (and if OP means something else, well, then this is what I was and am arguing for): when one account is doing the same thing for more than 100 hours / week, then fatigue sets in for that single activity. It grows slowly at first, but when growing uninterrupted, it grows ever quicker. If allowed to accumulate, it makes the activity next to worthless (exponentially diminishing returns with a very low starting slope). Level of fatigue directly translates into less income from the fatigued activity. Stopping the activity, whether logged in or out, reduces fatigue gradually.
Many were saying something along the lines of "player has to stop activity xy after 2 hours". No. I am arguing on a completely different scale. Any mentally and bodily healthy person who does the same ISK-generating eve-online activity for more than 100 hours / week for more than two weeks in a row - isn't.
Even with 50 hours / week with the very same activity we are looking at a very rare (I hope!) kind of person who definitely needs an incentive to do something else.
Even a marathon weekend with friends - how many of those would one spend ONLY on actively mining, or ONLY ratting or another of those activities the whole frigging time? If you did, what would be the point of spending it with friends?
With this scale-of-relevance (100 hours / week buffer), the vast majority of players that are actively playing the game and have not become human vegetables will be completely unaffected themselves. (Simply put: no real player would ever even notice such a feature. CCP could silently implement it and whoever notices it and complains to CCP is in for a thorough scrutiny of his accounts.) And of the few real players that would be affected, CCP would actually do them a favour to give them a nudge to go give their brain some variety (in their state of mind, I actually doubt they would even notice). The only ones who will be adversely affected would be the non-human interactors. It would limit the influx of ISK and assets from them and limit the unfair advantage that those who run the bots have. And thus favour the people really, actively playing the game.
Banning bots entirely would be even better. We all know that CCP has not managed yet to do that. Next best to getting rid of a malady is to reduce the severity of its effects. OP has shown a way that would help with that.
Still +1. There is arguably no actual justification of the measure in what you stated here. You argue that the measure will affect only a very small number of people, meaning the actual changes aren't worth the dev time as the number of players causing what we can't even agree is an issue is inconsequential.
Further you again bring up the issue of using actions that are against the EULA and have their own means of being dealt with as a justification for what is, again, so isolated in practice that it's not worth implementing. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1444
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 20:56:31 -
[179] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:And just to reiterate again...the PLEX market...it provides a mechanism to transfer in game wealth from the 10 account/10 hour a day no lifer to the new casual player...who has a job that pays way, way more than the imputed wage of the no lifer living in his Aunt Gladys' basement. This is the very problem: currently a normal human player is more or less mandated to buy extra PLEX-es to play EVE, making the game practically pay-to-win with the bizarre twist that he isn't even paying to the developer, but he pays for the account of a no-lifer player. Why should anyone pay money to another player for the privilege of playing the game?! While I'm not trying to stop PLEX trading (as it is necessary to somehow limit RMT) and I see no problem if some moron pays $1500 to buy a titan from a PL or Snuff Box alt, I do find it a problem if ordinary players can't make ends meet, because they are outmarketed by 10 account 10 hour/day nolifers/botters. This problem is a fabrication you have created, though for what purpose beyond pushing your agenda I do not know. The reason plex as a system works is because a sufficient number of players can afford them, meaning either bots are excessively prolific AND isk inflation is largely mythical since one can afford to PLEX without them or, much more likely, there are more than sufficient avenues in constant use to make sufficient isk to afford them.
If anything it seems your suggestion is aimed at those who fund plexing through legitimate PvE using "no-lifers" and bots as a smokescreen. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1168
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 21:20:46 -
[180] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:This is the very problem: currently a normal human player is more or less mandated to buy extra PLEX-es to play EVE, making the game practically pay-to-win
What the hell are you smoking? Never in my life have I heard such utter drivel.
It is not even believable.
Mandated to buy plex indeed, what hogwash. |
|
Iain Cariaba
1336
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 22:29:10 -
[181] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:This is the very problem: currently a normal human player is more or less mandated to buy extra PLEX-es to play EVE, making the game practically pay-to-win I currently PLEX my four accounts because I have decided to put the money I usually spend on my accounts into buying a motorcycle. Prior to that decision, I funded my accounts using my debit card. Once my motorcycle is paid off in October, I shall return to paying for my accounts with my debit card, instead of PLEXing them.
I consider myself a normal human player. I don't have a vast armada of mining barges grinding away to make me isk. Sure, I have 10 characters spread among my 4 accounts, but, other than some slight overlap to provide support in certain areas, each character has a drastically different role. I don't usually play for 10 hours a day. Recently I'm lucky to get 10 hours in a week among all my accounts.
At no time in my 10 years of playing Eve have I ever felt mandated to sell PLEX, or the GTCs that pre-dated PLEX. Sure, I've occasionally sold a few when I wanted something shiney and didn't want to wait for the isk. I usually ended up losing those in relatively short order, though, because I didn't train the support skills I would have if I had worked for the isk. Regardless of their eventual fate, the decision to not wait was entirely due to my own decision, not by some pressing need to "pay-to-win."
EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
I couldn't have said it better.
|
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
627
|
Posted - 2015.05.09 04:12:34 -
[182] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Gevlon Goblin wrote:This is the very problem: currently a normal human player is more or less mandated to buy extra PLEX-es to play EVE, making the game practically pay-to-win What the hell are you smoking? Never in my life have I heard such utter drivel. It is not even believable. Mandated to buy plex indeed, what hogwash.
Its the age of paid dlc's and in app purchases man...people accept and willingly pay for the base game, then the side stuff these days. They now think this common enough to be normal and smart.
Old man rant about the young ones needing stuff now now now....and forgot the value of patience. Me I spammed level 4 then ratted in 0.0 on plain ole drake for quite a while. Then picked up a fire sale raven..spammed it. Noting special about these ships, not isk per our monsters but they paid the bills and made some extra to save up. But thats me, I learned eve is a journey not a destination.
Shame really as its these idiots who ruined gaming as whole really imo. They bought into the whole dlc/in app purchase bit hook line and sinker. I remember many moons ago DLC content was already in the games and paid for. All you had to was unlock it with some good ole fashioned (and free) extra gameplay. Was this stuff unlock in one night? Not really. It was the carrot for replays, playing harder levels, doing off the wall crap in game, etc. Miss these days tbh. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1171
|
Posted - 2015.05.09 08:30:40 -
[183] - Quote
Zan Shiro wrote:afkalt wrote:Gevlon Goblin wrote:This is the very problem: currently a normal human player is more or less mandated to buy extra PLEX-es to play EVE, making the game practically pay-to-win What the hell are you smoking? Never in my life have I heard such utter drivel. It is not even believable. Mandated to buy plex indeed, what hogwash. Its the age of paid dlc's and in app purchases man...people accept and willingly pay for the base game, then the side stuff these days. They now think this common enough to be normal and smart. Old man rant about the young ones needing stuff now now now....and forgot the value of patience. Me I spammed level 4 then ratted in 0.0 on plain ole drake for quite a while. Then picked up a fire sale raven..spammed it. Noting special about these ships, not isk per our monsters but they paid the bills and made some extra to save up. But thats me, I learned eve is a journey not a destination. Shame really as its these idiots who ruined gaming as whole really imo. They bought into the whole dlc/in app purchase bit hook line and sinker. I remember many moons ago DLC content was already in the games and paid for. All you had to was unlock it with some good ole fashioned (and free) extra gameplay. Was this stuff unlock in one night? Not really. It was the carrot for replays, playing harder levels, doing off the wall crap in game, etc. Miss these days tbh.
I totally agree, though it still isn't a reason for the madcap tollpost OP.
I've lost billions worth of assets, killed countless more. I've not sold a plex, indeed I'm stockpiling them when I have spare isk yet I still have stables of pimped ships, capitals, high grade pods etc etc. I don't play that hard, I just play smart. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1141
|
Posted - 2015.05.09 09:43:07 -
[184] - Quote
I just play...smart would be too much effort... |
Enso Nibbana
Brahman
1
|
Posted - 2015.05.09 15:45:20 -
[185] - Quote
Why not just remove plex? |
Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort DARKNESS.
49
|
Posted - 2015.05.09 18:11:14 -
[186] - Quote
Enso Nibbana wrote:Why not just remove plex?
Not too far off the mark. More like remove the subscription. |
Iain Cariaba
1341
|
Posted - 2015.05.09 20:02:59 -
[187] - Quote
Zan Shiro wrote:afkalt wrote:Gevlon Goblin wrote:This is the very problem: currently a normal human player is more or less mandated to buy extra PLEX-es to play EVE, making the game practically pay-to-win What the hell are you smoking? Never in my life have I heard such utter drivel. It is not even believable. Mandated to buy plex indeed, what hogwash. Its the age of paid dlc's and in app purchases man...people accept and willingly pay for the base game, then the side stuff these days. They now think this common enough to be normal and smart. Old man rant about the young ones needing stuff now now now....and forgot the value of patience. Me I spammed level 4 then ratted in 0.0 on plain ole drake for quite a while. Then picked up a fire sale raven..spammed it. Noting special about these ships, not isk per our monsters but they paid the bills and made some extra to save up. But thats me, I learned eve is a journey not a destination. Shame really as its these idiots who ruined gaming as whole really imo. They bought into the whole dlc/in app purchase bit hook line and sinker. I remember many moons ago DLC content was already in the games and paid for. All you had to was unlock it with some good ole fashioned (and free) extra gameplay. Was this stuff unlock in one night? Not really. It was the carrot for replays, playing harder levels, doing off the wall crap in game, etc. Miss these days tbh. Damn it, CCP!!! Let me like a post more than once! This is one I totally agree with.
EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
I couldn't have said it better.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1171
|
Posted - 2015.05.09 21:34:26 -
[188] - Quote
Enso Nibbana wrote:Why not just remove plex?
Well for me, for all I've never had to use it, it's a nice option to have available.
It's also a beautiful way to 'store' liquid isk if on an extended hiatus |
Enso Nibbana
Brahman
1
|
Posted - 2015.05.10 04:22:41 -
[189] - Quote
Nasar Vyron wrote:Enso Nibbana wrote:Why not just remove plex? Not too far off the mark. More like remove the subscription.
No. |
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
243
|
Posted - 2015.05.10 04:59:52 -
[190] - Quote
Quote:PS: trading is PvP, please don't be the moron who suggest fatigue on setting/modifying orders! tsk tsk... Gevlon, you cannot logically say: hands off my bread basket when proposing to stick your fingers in the bread basket of other people. PvP is an ISK sink (things go boom, requiring them to be rebuilt/farmed/bought again). Market trading, which I agree is a PvP activity (just ask my market trader), is not an ISK sink - unless you bought Genolution 3 and 4s just before the birthday gift was announced. But that was not destruction of isk so much as gain/loss.
That said: your premise is incorrect. You propose that giving fatigue to the individual is the better way to increase their activities in other areas of EVE online - like PvP. However, PvP itself is not impacted by fatigue so much as the ability to move large ships great distances over a short span of time. PvE is different from this activity - people have to hunt for their prey - unless they go to the predictable locations for ganking: Mission hubs and mining centers.
Instead, what you really want, and would certainly increase PvP in High Sec by giving people more of a reason to wardec or gank each other is system fatigue. Why should more pirate activity be in and around Osmon when so many people are taking missions to eliminate those same pirates? Over time, what should happen is that frequency and quality of missions, minerals, and rats decreases with sustained capsuleer activity. Both in High Sec, Low Sec, and Null Sec.
Unlike jump fatigue this would be more dynamic in that the fatigue is ever present but fluctuates with activity - higher activity results in the system having higher fatigue for a given category while a drop in activity leads to a lessening of the fatigue.
While there is somewhat of a natural control on mining now via depletion of belts, they respawn at a predictable rate. If there were system wide fatigue on mining, then the rate of renewal on the roids would be lower and continue to decrease until the system fatigue begins to reverse. Miners would then need to migrate more often, seeking systems with less fatigue.
Mission givers would start running out of missions as the system fatigue increased. It would start by causing mission runners to travel further to complete the mission until the mission giver has lower quality missions to give (that level 4 agent has only what a level 1 agent has to offer - but further to travel to complete) and even, if the fatigue is high enough, no missions to give until a day or two later. The fatigue would build up by the type of missions as opposed to missions overall. but would still impact any areas of cross over - mining missions would be impacted and impact mining fatigue in a system. shooting red things would be impacted by belt ratting and would likewise impact belt ratting and anomolies. Hauling missions would be impacted by actual market activity of a system.
In Null Sec, while arrays can make it easier to locate anomolies that can be adjusted to lower the rate of fatigue accrual - but not negate it. An overly ratted null sec system will eventually find they have exhausted the local pirates to the point of submission. The Arrays will allow the fatigue to recover faster, but carrier ratters will eventually need to move to other systems to rat.
Market Fatigue: hey, brokers are busy people and the market hubs should see higher broker fees. After all - the more they work, the more they should be paid - and since it is regional... well... the fatigue would be regional as well.
Industry has already had the equivalent of jump fatigue in the form of the dynamic increase in fees paid to research and manufacture. Clearly nothing would need to be done there again.
ps - plex increase from last year is under 20% from roughtly 720million to 850million. |
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2889
|
Posted - 2015.05.10 06:52:47 -
[191] - Quote
Petrified wrote:Quote:PS: trading is PvP, please don't be the moron who suggest fatigue on setting/modifying orders! tsk tsk... Gevlon, you cannot logically say: hands off my bread basket when proposing to stick your fingers in the bread basket of other people. PvP is an ISK sink (things go boom, requiring them to be rebuilt/farmed/bought again). Market trading, which I agree is a PvP activity (just ask my market trader), is not an ISK sink - unless you bought Genolution 3 and 4s just before the birthday gift was announced. But that was not destruction of isk so much as gain/loss. That said: your premise is incorrect. You propose that giving fatigue to the individual is the better way to increase their activities in other areas of EVE online - like PvP. However, PvP itself is not impacted by fatigue so much as the ability to move large ships great distances over a short span of time. PvE is different from this activity - people have to hunt for their prey - unless they go to the predictable locations for ganking: Mission hubs and mining centers. Instead, what you really want, and would certainly increase PvP in High Sec by giving people more of a reason to wardec or gank each other is system fatigue. Why should more pirate activity be in and around Osmon when so many people are taking missions to eliminate those same pirates? Over time, what should happen is that frequency and quality of missions, minerals, and rats decreases with sustained capsuleer activity. Both in High Sec, Low Sec, and Null Sec. Unlike jump fatigue this would be more dynamic in that the fatigue is ever present but fluctuates with activity - higher activity results in the system having higher fatigue for a given category while a drop in activity leads to a lessening of the fatigue. While there is somewhat of a natural control on mining now via depletion of belts, they respawn at a predictable rate. If there were system wide fatigue on mining, then the rate of renewal on the roids would be lower and continue to decrease until the system fatigue begins to reverse. Miners would then need to migrate more often, seeking systems with less fatigue. Mission givers would start running out of missions as the system fatigue increased. It would start by causing mission runners to travel further to complete the mission until the mission giver has lower quality missions to give (that level 4 agent has only what a level 1 agent has to offer - but further to travel to complete) and even, if the fatigue is high enough, no missions to give until a day or two later. The fatigue would build up by the type of missions as opposed to missions overall. but would still impact any areas of cross over - mining missions would be impacted and impact mining fatigue in a system. shooting red things would be impacted by belt ratting and would likewise impact belt ratting and anomolies. Hauling missions would be impacted by actual market activity of a system. In Null Sec, while arrays can make it easier to locate anomolies that can be adjusted to lower the rate of fatigue accrual - but not negate it. An overly ratted null sec system will eventually find they have exhausted the local pirates to the point of submission. The Arrays will allow the fatigue to recover faster, but carrier ratters will eventually need to move to other systems to rat. Market Fatigue: hey, brokers are busy people and the market hubs should see higher broker fees. After all - the more they work, the more they should be paid - and since it is regional... well... the fatigue would be regional as well. Industry has already had the equivalent of jump fatigue in the form of the dynamic increase in fees paid to research and manufacture. Clearly nothing would need to be done there again. ps - plex increase from last year is under 20% from roughtly 720million to 850million.
I really doubt you'd see the outcome you are thinking would occur.
People who like PvP, by and large leave hi sec. Except for people who like to war dec or gank already, primarily PvE players are not going to suddenly start ganking and war deccing. When system fatigue gets too high...they'll simply move to another system. If this subgroup of players like PvP they'd already be war deccing, ganking, or moving to low sec or null sec. They haven't so it is unlikely they will.
Also, there is the problem that you cannot secure a HS system except with substantial resources...resources that only organizations like NS alliances/coalitions can provide and only for a brief time (a few days, a week or two tops). No matter how many people you war dec that have been running mission in Fricoure, once the fatigue starts to recede non-war decced mission runners will come in. And players can move to NPC corps and new players can stay in noob corps...so no war decs there. That pretty much leaves ganking...and ganking in systems above 0.6 is not easy. Again you'll need several players and unless you have several hundred good luck ganking enough people in a major mission running hub. And you cannot lock people out of station...or lock their assets in. And ganking has sec status issues too. Soon you might have to start using an alt to bring in ships and an orca.
Yeah, I don't see too many dedicated HS PvE type doing this...why it sounds like being a HS pirate.
And the industry version of "fatigue" has had little to no effect on HS PvP.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6717
|
Posted - 2015.05.10 06:58:27 -
[192] - Quote
An endless number of activities that need to have fatigue timers attached to them, this thread really revolutionized the way I think about eve online, an internet timer spreadsheet
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
244
|
Posted - 2015.05.10 10:08:14 -
[193] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:I really doubt you'd see the outcome you are thinking would occur. People who like PvP, by and large leave hi sec. Except for people who like to war dec or gank already, primarily PvE players are not going to suddenly start ganking and war deccing. When system fatigue gets too high...they'll simply move to another system. If this subgroup of players like PvP they'd already be war deccing, ganking, or moving to low sec or null sec. They haven't so it is unlikely they will. Also, there is the problem that you cannot secure a HS system except with substantial resources...resources that only organizations like NS alliances/coalitions can provide and only for a brief time (a few days, a week or two tops). No matter how many people you war dec that have been running mission in Fricoure, once the fatigue starts to recede non-war decced mission runners will come in. And players can move to NPC corps and new players can stay in noob corps...so no war decs there. That pretty much leaves ganking...and ganking in systems above 0.6 is not easy. Again you'll need several players and unless you have several hundred good luck ganking enough people in a major mission running hub. And you cannot lock people out of station...or lock their assets in. And ganking has sec status issues too. Soon you might have to start using an alt to bring in ships and an orca. Yeah, I don't see too many dedicated HS PvE type doing this...why it sounds like being a HS pirate. And the industry version of "fatigue" has had little to no effect on HS PvP.
My personal feeling on the whole matter is this: forms of regulation always end up hurting the small and the new more than the established. Where I am from, a lot of larger corporations will shrug at legislation that would impact them simply because such legislation impacts those that would start up and compete against them.
Worse, is that jump fatigue only effects a certain aspect of PvP: frequency of moving a capital via Cyno. Gevlon's proposal impacts a far wider area than simply moving a capital without a gate: it impacts how long you can perform an activity. To draw a better comparison it would be more appropriate if Gevlon's proposal fell on the heels of a nerf to PvP that said: after 1 hour/day of PvP you cannot PvP anymore. Likewise: after 1 hour/day of mining, you cannot mine any more.
What I am trying to illustrate to Gevlon is that if he were proposing something along the lines of a jump fatigue for PvE, then what I propose is more in line to that than his proposal. Additionally, what I propose would make more sense than: oh sorry, you spent an hour doing X - no more X for you.
Another way to put is that Gevlon proposes an Apple to CCP's Orange of Jump Fatigue. I offer a Tangerine. |
Gevlon Goblin
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
421
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 04:34:46 -
[194] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Quote:Nobody should feel the need to play the game 24/7 in order to be competitive. Which is the problem with PvE. Even if you run incursions or capital escalations, you'll earn less than the guy who run 10 veldspar miners all day. His main will have more ships, more mercs, more everything.
People who can spend their limited time better should earn more ISK, not the people who have more time to run their accounts.
My blog: greedygoblin.blogspot.com
|
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
657
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 05:07:20 -
[195] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote: Quote:Nobody should feel the need to play the game 24/7 in order to be competitive. Which is the problem with PvE. Even if you run incursions or capital escalations, you'll earn less than the guy who run 10 veldspar miners all day. His main will have more ships, more mercs, more everything. People who can spend their limited time better should earn more ISK, not the people who have more time to run their accounts. Lol, the no lifers are vastly outnumbered by the casuals, even in hardcore incursion communities and mining corps, so no one is required to be on 24/7 to be competitive. At the usual income rates, it takes about 2.25 hours per week to plex, far from "no-life" territory, and then it isn't a major issue.
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2903
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 05:55:24 -
[196] - Quote
Petrified wrote:
My personal feeling on the whole matter is this: forms of regulation always end up hurting the small and the new more than the established. Where I am from, a lot of larger corporations will shrug at legislation that would impact them simply because such legislation impacts those that would start up and compete against them.
You have not gone far enough, IMO. Those big corporations will actually support such regulations precisely because it reduces the competition and creates a barrier to entry. There is actually a term for this, rent seeking.
Petrified wrote:Worse, is that jump fatigue only effects a certain aspect of PvP: frequency of moving a capital via Cyno. Gevlon's proposal impacts a far wider area than simply moving a capital without a gate: it impacts how long you can perform an activity. To draw a better comparison it would be more appropriate if Gevlon's proposal fell on the heels of a nerf to PvP that said: after 1 hour/day of PvP you cannot PvP anymore. Likewise: after 1 hour/day of mining, you cannot mine any more. What I am trying to illustrate to Gevlon is that if he were proposing something along the lines of a jump fatigue for PvE, then what I propose is more in line to that than his proposal. Additionally, what I propose would make more sense than: oh sorry, you spent an hour doing X - no more X for you. Another way to put is that Gevlon proposes an Apple to CCP's Orange of Jump Fatigue. I offer a Tangerine.
I understand, but I don't think it will work other than to spread PvE people and have them become more nomadic...and the one group where securing a system is actually doable and rotating between systems and exploiting things in a systematic way...null sec.
Personally, I think there is probably too much ISK flowing into the game economy, however there are ways to deal with it other than this which is extremely imprecise.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2903
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 06:11:56 -
[197] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote: Quote:Nobody should feel the need to play the game 24/7 in order to be competitive. Which is the problem with PvE. Even if you run incursions or capital escalations, you'll earn less than the guy who run 10 veldspar miners all day. His main will have more ships, more mercs, more everything. People who can spend their limited time better should earn more ISK, not the people who have more time to run their accounts.
So what, all he is doing is mining all day.
And frankly how can a human player play "all day"...every day? I'm calling Bravo Sierra. And such a "player" who is logging in day in and day out and mining will be scrutinized very heavily by CCP.
So the entire premise of yours is extremely dubious, therefore the conclusions are too.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1174
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 07:23:19 -
[198] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote: Quote:Nobody should feel the need to play the game 24/7 in order to be competitive. Which is the problem with PvE. Even if you run incursions or capital escalations, you'll earn less than the guy who run 10 veldspar miners all day. His main will have more ships, more mercs, more everything. People who can spend their limited time better should earn more ISK, not the people who have more time to run their accounts.
You fail to show how it is required to be 'competitive'.
The thing about Eve is, throwing isk at a fight doesn't win it. This is why you don't see officer fit frigates. This is why people still laught at stupid bling deaths. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3227
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 07:58:56 -
[199] - Quote
I love you Gevlon Goblin.
If you didn't already exist we'd have had to invent you ourselves.
Post on the Eve-o forums with a Goonswarm Federation character that drinking bleach is bad for you, and 20 forum warriors will hospitalise themselves trying to prove you wrong.
|
Null Infinity
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
31
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 08:50:09 -
[200] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:I dare everyone to ignore this an allow it to gracefully fall to the bottom of the forums.
I think this post has gathered most likes in the whole unfortunate thread for a reason. Please stop feeding him, would we? Just ignore it.
New mining menthods: interactive mining
and comet mining
|
|
Felix Judge
Gallente Rebels Inc. Villore Accords
20
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 12:19:41 -
[201] - Quote
Null Infinity wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote:I dare everyone to ignore this an allow it to gracefully fall to the bottom of the forums. I think this post has gathered most likes in the whole unfortunate thread for a reason. Please stop feeding him, would we? Just ignore it. Yes, ignore it!
OHHHHHH, the irony! |
Felix Judge
Gallente Rebels Inc. Villore Accords
20
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 12:41:05 -
[202] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Felix Judge wrote:* Market activity already HAS not only a fatigue, but actually a hard limit that hits much quicker than after 50+ hours / week of doing it regularly, for all of those who are apparently oblivious of it: each character can only have 305 active buy/sell orders at the same time. [...] This statement is fundamentally flawed. You consider your activity hard capped by having 305 orders but my activity uncapped when as a combat PvE'er I can engage at most 13 targets at a time (max 8 weapon hardpoints + 5 drones all engaging individual targets, which is a terrible thing to do but demonstrates a point). He clearly has the advantage there and nothing prevents the use of additional characters to get around that limit. Unlike me he doesn't even have to have those characters on different accounts for them to act simultaneously. In a single account I'm capped at 13 engagements but he can have up to 915. You can still rat all day, while a trader cannot do much worth his time after he has filled his order allotment. Updating and putting up 5-10 new ones each day hardly lasts 10+ hours a day, even with 3 market characters to an account.
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Felix Judge wrote: [only bots and vegetables play for more than 10 hours / day for longer than 2 weeks, so very few players would be affected directly by a 100 hours/week - fatigue] There is arguably no actual justification of the measure in what you stated here. You argue that the measure will affect only a very small number of people, meaning the actual changes aren't worth the dev time as the number of players causing what we can't even agree is an issue is inconsequential. Further you again bring up the issue of using actions that are against the EULA and have their own means of being dealt with as a justification for what is, again, so isolated in practice that it's not worth implementing. I argue that it will indeed affect few players directly (this word was included in my original quote, you may have overlooked that). It will affect bots and vegetables a lot, though. And since it will decrease influx of ISK and material from these heavily, it will affect all real, actively playing players positively. And it would be another, smart way to deal with an activity that violates the EULA, and that conventional methods are not entirely successful at preventing so far. It is an auto-smart mechanism that would work all by itself, without the need to manually identify the longer-running bots and ban them. Team Security could focus on finding shorter-running bots and other villains. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1177
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 17:08:33 -
[203] - Quote
Now I know you're trolling. Orders are adjusted 23.5/7/365. Likewise cancelled and fulfilled.
Or are you going to try and tell me 0.01isking doesn't happen? Are you going to tell me the trader who does this all day, every day can be competed with by someone playing an hour a night?
Life isn't fair, neither is eve. |
Kaerakh
POS Party Low-Class
514
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 17:25:59 -
[204] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Now I know you're trolling. Orders are adjusted 23.5/7/365. Likewise cancelled and fulfilled.
Or are you going to try and tell me 0.01isking doesn't happen? Are you going to tell me the trader who does this all day, every day can be competed with by someone playing an hour a night?
Life isn't fair, neither is eve.
Exactly, see third link in signature.
Schrodinger's Hot Dropper
The Fate of Forum Alts
Guaranteed Success
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2909
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 17:28:23 -
[205] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:I love you Gevlon Goblin.
If you didn't already exist we'd have had to invent you ourselves.
I have to admit reading his website reminds me of the mad ramblings one might find in a Lovecraftian horror story.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
chaosgrimm
Universal Production and Networking Services
193
|
Posted - 2015.05.12 19:08:36 -
[206] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote: The real result would be the same as with Phoebe. The PvP-er of a local small corp don't have to travel to use his carrier, so he is unaffected. The casual miner or ratter already pays for his account, and wouldn't PvE enough to get fatigue penalty so his PvE has no new costs. Without the insane competition of no-lifers and bots, his earnings would actually worth something and he'd be encouraged to continue.
PS: trading is PvP, please don't be the moron who suggest fatigue on setting/modifying orders!
Do you have any data that would suggest this outcome.
Jump fatigue and your 'PvE fatigue' are not comparable. Even the names give that away.... It's called 'jump fatigue' and not 'PvP fatigue' because the effect is on 'jumping', a tactic within PvP, and not 'PvP' itself. It shouldnt surprise you to see that PvP hasn't declined, while jumping has.
You even call your suggestion 'PvE fatigue': i.e. the scope is PvE in general, rather than a tactic used in PvE. Implementing your "PvE fatigue" will result in less PvE because it's scope is PvE. I thought you were trying to increase activity?
What is / are your goal(s)? What justifies them? Do you have anything that would indicate that your suggestion, if implemented, would achieve your goals?
|
Gevlon Goblin
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
421
|
Posted - 2015.05.13 17:22:31 -
[207] - Quote
chaosgrimm wrote:Jump fatigue and your 'PvE fatigue' are not comparable. Even the names give that away.... It's called 'jump fatigue' and not 'PvP fatigue' because the effect is on 'jumping', a tactic within PvP, and not 'PvP' itself. It shouldnt surprise you to see that PvP hasn't declined, while jumping has.
You even call your suggestion 'PvE fatigue': i.e. the scope is PvE in general, rather than a tactic used in PvE. Implementing your "PvE fatigue" will result in less PvE because it's scope is PvE. I thought you were trying to increase activity?
What is / are your goal(s)? What justifies them? Do you have anything that would indicate that your suggestion, if implemented, would achieve your goals? "PvE" is in itself a tactic for making ISK. You can do exploration, you can loot player wrecks, you can trade, you can do PI, you can mine, you can do missions, you can rat anoms in normal space and in WH and so on, and so on. Some needs more skill than others, some need a group, special ships and so on.
However currently the tactic of "take the dumbest, lowest paying forms of moneymaking and run them with lots of accounts and lots of hours, maybe with bot" is dominating the scene. I wish to increase the weight of more complicated, skill- and ship-intensive forms of moneymaking.
Justification: the game should be competitive and skill-demanding, not a botting heaven.
"the dumbest, lowest paying forms of moneymaking" is paying crap unless ran for lots of hours. 2 hours of mining in highsec a day with one account barely pays for a PLEX. A time-limit would devastate this way while wouldn't affect the complicated forms of ISK making.
My blog: greedygoblin.blogspot.com
|
Felix Judge
Gallente Rebels Inc. Villore Accords
21
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 11:12:58 -
[208] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Now I know you're trolling. Orders are adjusted 23.5/7/365. Likewise cancelled and fulfilled.
Or are you going to try and tell me 0.01isking doesn't happen? Are you going to tell me the trader who does this all day, every day can be competed with by someone playing an hour a night?
Life isn't fair, neither is eve. The most successful trader I know about is actually ridiculing the 0.01-adjusting and strongly suggests to not waste one's time doing it. You can read that in his older blog articles.
But okay, if there is a way to attach fatigue to market trading, I am all for it. It could be done via increasing the market fees for updating orders where it happens quite often in short time intervals. This would also affect bots more than it would humans.
Good point, Mr afkalt.
|
Gevlon Goblin
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
423
|
Posted - 2015.05.23 07:51:41 -
[209] - Quote
Trading is still a zero sum (PvP) activity. Whatever one player gains is paid by the another. If two players trade the sum of their wealth stays the same. On the other hand if they rat, the sum of their wealth grows.
Which is the problem with "you can rat/mine 80 hours a week too, make an effort scrub" comments. If everyone would go multibox-nolifer, then everyone would have 10 titans and the game would be quite boring.
My blog: greedygoblin.blogspot.com
|
HarlyQ
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
99
|
Posted - 2015.05.28 20:58:07 -
[210] - Quote
I do not know why you think market trading is pvp when it is the easiest money making activity in eve. Also known as Gevlon Goblin station trades so don't nerf his game play but nerf everyone elses. Please go back to huffing the bad crack you smoke on that ****** blog of yours. |
|
Felix Judge
Gallente Rebels Inc. Villore Accords
22
|
Posted - 2015.06.04 10:30:26 -
[211] - Quote
The game is full of diminishing returns mechanics, most notably:
* Higher skill levels need much more time than each lower level * Most modules and rigs that affect ship stats experience stacking penalties * Research times on blueprint originals
Diminishing returns are good to make players think about effective alternatives, and they effectively limit "I-Win-Button" - strategies that would otherwise become overpowered quickly if they would scale proportionally, instead of reverse exponentially. And they still leave players the choice: You can still fit five magnetic field stabilizers if you want, so it does not forcibly prevent you from doing what you think to be good.
Likewise, diminishing returns on PvE activities would encourage, but not force, players to look for alternative activities. They can still rat for 14 hours a day if they want (*shudder*). |
Navy Jackal
University of Caille Gallente Federation
10
|
Posted - 2015.06.04 10:37:47 -
[212] - Quote
Null Infinity wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote:I dare everyone to ignore this an allow it to gracefully fall to the bottom of the forums. I think this post has gathered most likes in the whole unfortunate thread for a reason. Please stop feeding him, would we? Just ignore it.
Just let this thread die, whould we? Bad idea, most of us agreed on this. Point. |
Felix Judge
Gallente Rebels Inc. Villore Accords
22
|
Posted - 2015.06.04 11:08:14 -
[213] - Quote
Navy Jackal wrote:Just let this thread die, whould we? Bad idea, most of us agreed on this. Point. Menor pars, sanior pars
Seriously, I think arguments weigh more than "stop it because I/we do not like it" and "Point." (Incidentally, the correct English term you might be looking for would probably be "Fullstop.") Where was I? Ah, yes: arguments. Right.
|
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
313
|
Posted - 2015.06.04 14:14:39 -
[214] - Quote
Felix Judge wrote:Diminishing returns are good to make players think about effective alternatives, and they effectively limit "I-Win-Button" I agree that diminishing returns are good IF we were discussing ship fittings, but we are not.
If bots are the problem then deal with the bots directly, don't try to do it by introducing a ridiculous idea that affects everyone in the game at some point.
But the real question really is this. If a person wants to spend 15 or 20 hours a day mining or whatever how does that affect you?
The OP idea carefully crafted to only affect a small portion of those involved in PvE activities, but not everyone equally and for this reason alone it is a terrible idea.
So this begs the question how and why are these specific areas left un-affected by this? Is it because they are the favored play styles of the OP? Did the OP carefully craft this so it only affects the play styles he does not approve of?
If you want anyone to even give this idea a serious look, much less support it go back to the very beginning and re-work the entire concept so it affects all non-PvP (insert traditional shoot other players ships definition here) equally. Otherwise this is simply an idea to restrict a game play style the OP does not agree with so it will always get a no from me. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1338
|
Posted - 2015.06.04 14:16:45 -
[215] - Quote
Donnachadh wrote:re-work the entire concept so it affects all non-PvP
Keeping in mind that it is all but impossible to NOT PvP with ANY activity in this game. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2975
|
Posted - 2015.06.04 15:21:21 -
[216] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:Trading is still a zero sum (PvP) activity. Whatever one player gains is paid by the another. If two players trade the sum of their wealth stays the same. On the other hand if they rat, the sum of their wealth grows.
Which is the problem with "you can rat/mine 80 hours a week too, make an effort scrub" comments. If everyone would go multibox-nolifer, then everyone would have 10 titans and the game would be quite boring.
No, it is negative sum due to taxes and fees (aka transactions costs). Also, trade is mutually beneficial, so to call it PvP is...kinda odd. If I buy something you are selling that strongly implies I want it enough I'm willing to pay at least the price you are asking or even more and that you don't want it at that price or an even lower one (see the concepts of consumer and producer surpluses).
Further, while trade reduces overall wealth due to taxes and fees and at the same time it changes the distribution of wealth. This is not insignificant either. If the wealth goes from the guy who was ratting to the trader it also moves on from there as well. The trader will want new stock so he'll go to the guys building that stock (builders and inventors and explorers and even in some cases ratters). The inventors and builders will likely go and buy minerals and other inputs as well.
The in-game economy is really a web of activities and the isk flows through this web.
As for the guy ratting 80 hours a week...I'll say it again, I'm sure CCP is aware of those "players" and there is considerable scrutiny of them as 80 hours a week is ratting 11.5 hours a day (on average)...that is alot if the player is doing it day-in-and-day-out.
As for the growth of "wealth" you mention what you really mean is the money supply which is different. ISK does not have any innate value. In fact, ISK is an awesome example of fiat money (money that has value because we are told it has value). Most modern currencies are fiat money in that the innate value of the money is very low or even zero, but people believe it has value therefore it has value and can be used as a medium of exchange. Interestingly, when that belief is challenged is when you have a currency crisis which can lead to things like hyperinflation. Having positive growth of the money supply is not inherently a bad thing; what can be a bad thing is if the money supply grows too fast then you can have inflation and that can be bad. And CCP is aware of the money supply and monitors it. The issue here, if there is one, could be solved via a mechanism suggested here, but it can be managed in other ways as well. For example, reducing rat bounties, reducing anomaly spawn rates, or even more subtle changes such as changes to mechanics that make it easier to hunt and kill ratters.
As I also noted, if CCP felt that ISBoxer and other similar programs were really a serious problem there is a much, much more elegant solution: ban those programs.
Why you feel the need to punish the person who rats a few hours a day (at most) and has an extra account or two is beyond me.
Oh...and one last thing...mining does not increase the money supply either....so its kind of like trading.
Maybe you should think a bit more before posting.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2975
|
Posted - 2015.06.04 15:23:15 -
[217] - Quote
Felix Judge wrote:The game is full of diminishing returns mechanics, most notably:
* Higher skill levels need much more time than each lower level * Most modules and rigs that affect ship stats experience stacking penalties * Research times on blueprint originals
Diminishing returns are good to make players think about effective alternatives, and they effectively limit "I-Win-Button" - strategies that would otherwise become overpowered quickly if they would scale proportionally, instead of reverse exponentially. And they still leave players the choice: You can still fit five magnetic field stabilizers if you want, so it does not forcibly prevent you from doing what you think to be good.
Likewise, diminishing returns on PvE activities would encourage, but not force, players to look for alternative activities. They can still rat for 14 hours a day if they want (*shudder*).
Diminishing returns on mechanics is one thing...diminishing returns on actually playing the game is entirely another thing.
That you cannot see a difference indicates you just are not thinking this through clearly.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Agondray
Avenger Mercenaries VOID Intergalactic Forces
306
|
Posted - 2015.06.04 15:31:28 -
[218] - Quote
El Creepo wrote:1bil for a -ú10 item is an EXTREEEEEEEMLY good deal. If I could cash out all my isk at 1bil per -ú10 cash I would be doing that all over the place. People need to stop crying at plex prices.
its a good deal for the buyer of the plex that's using his RL money to acquire it to sell, not so much for the people trying to live off of the plex by spending isk on it, which can be any number of reasons.
Trading should have fatigue to since it is PVP going from system to system is quite carebearish or else gankers would be ganking them.
so what after an hour when guns no longer work I would do what, float around, sit at my apartment board as can be?
Lets also not for get while people make billions in incursions, you can hardly get rid of 1 in an hour of play when you render a whole fleet worthless so incursions would end up staying for their full duration forcing people to move out of the region because they don't want to sit there for a week un able to do anything, and also not all incs last their week, most only last a few days, some less then that.
thank before you go and make a lot of play styles obsolete, while I agree and I want to see the army of alts die a horrible fiery death by being slowly dragged into a star (even ccp has a thing about it not advised to run multiple accounts) it isn't going to happen
"Sarcasm is the Recourse of a weak mind." -Dr. Smith
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2976
|
Posted - 2015.06.04 15:43:50 -
[219] - Quote
Gevlon is simply confused and rather ignorant, IMO.
He seems to confuse wealth and ISK. Wealth is often considered having an abundance of valuable/productive resources. ISK is not a productive resource. It can let you acquire valuable and productive resources in game, but in and of itself it has little innate value and is not at all productive (it is even less productive than real life currency which might have some minor and limited uses).
For example, yes a ratter will see his isk increase if he rats, but not necessarily his wealth. He can use his increased ISK to buy things that would increase his wealth, but that is not quite what Gevlon was writing.
So, if the issue is increasing one's wallet/ISK, both the trader and the ratter can do this. So his post about that looks confused and ill-thought out. In fact, I'd argue the trader is always increasing his wealth (valuable and productive assets) more so than the ratter. So, if increasing wealth is "bad" then we need to nerf Gevlon's game.
Or was it ISK that Gevlon was talking about? Well okay, but then why is he bitching endlessly about mining? Mining does not increase the amount of ISK in the game. Mining does increase one's wealth...so, maybe it is wealth after all, but then again that leads us back to nerfing Gevlon's game as well because apparently acquiring too much wealth is some how BadGäó.
But note that Gevlon has exempted his preferred activity from being nerfed.
In the end, I suggest that Gevlon is simply butthurt, for some inexplicable reason, that some players log in for long periods of time and do stuff he personally finds problematic. This however, is in absolutely no way provides justification for modifying the game. We all have our personal biases about various activities in the game and they should not be considered, by themselves, valid reasons for nerfing parts of the game.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Alexis Nightwish
226
|
Posted - 2015.06.04 18:43:02 -
[220] - Quote
Something I find fascinating, at least from a sociological viewpoint is that if anyone else had posted this idea it would have received about a page of "This is bad, you're bad, and should feel bad" type responses and then dropped into the void. But because GG posted it, it's run 11 pages and shows no sign of stopping. It's like he has some sort of Bizzaro World cult of personality.
Fascinating.
CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge
EVE Online's "I win!" Button
Fixing bombs, not the bombers
|
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1346
|
Posted - 2015.06.04 18:46:20 -
[221] - Quote
Alexis Nightwish wrote:Something I find fascinating, at least from a sociological viewpoint is that if anyone else had posted this idea it would have received about a page of "This is bad, you're bad, and should feel bad" type responses and then dropped into the void. But because GG posted it, it's run 11 pages and shows no sign of stopping. It's like he has some sort of Bizzaro World cult of personality.
Fascinating.
No, we tried to have it stomped out for the trolling it was, repeatedly. But were told off because he cried to mom.
But you're right, anyone else wouldn't have been given the time of day and nor would it have been unlocked several times. |
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
314
|
Posted - 2015.06.05 02:17:51 -
[222] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Donnachadh wrote:re-work the entire concept so it affects all non-PvP Keeping in mind that it is all but impossible to NOT PvP with ANY activity in this game. So typical of you to snip out a very small segment of a post and flat out ignore the most important part.
Donnachadh wrote: non-PvP (insert traditional shoot other players ships definition here) Yea you know the part where I explicitly defined my use of the term PvP. See quote above. |
Felix Judge
Gallente Rebels Inc. Villore Accords
22
|
Posted - 2015.06.05 08:26:31 -
[223] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Diminishing returns on mechanics is one thing...diminishing returns on actually playing the game is entirely another thing.
That you cannot see a difference indicates you just are not thinking this through clearly. When two things are different, there may be reason to treat them differently - but it is not compelling, of course. If the principle is good for either, then of course it is okay to apply it to either. Demanding to treat differently just because of being two different things (or rather, finding one differentiating trait, which is probably always possible if you only look for it hard enough) shows that it was not me who has not thought it through clearly.
I am of the opinion that diminshing returns are good for many activities - mining, ratting, setting/changing market orders, ... partly, because it encourages (but not forces) looking for alternatives, and mostly because that will hurt bots automatically without the need to find, scrutinize, evaluate, and ban bots manually. CCP would free up a lot of workforce for other things if game mechanics would hurt long-running bots automatically.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1352
|
Posted - 2015.06.05 09:08:45 -
[224] - Quote
Donnachadh wrote:afkalt wrote:Donnachadh wrote:re-work the entire concept so it affects all non-PvP Keeping in mind that it is all but impossible to NOT PvP with ANY activity in this game. So typical of you to snip out a very small segment of a post and flat out ignore the most important part. Donnachadh wrote: non-PvP (insert traditional shoot other players ships definition here) Yea you know the part where I explicitly defined my use of the term PvP. See quote above.
I wasn't having a pop at you, chill out. I was laying down the point that the OP attitude of "don't hurt my bit of the game because it's PvP" is bullcrap. |
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
2982
|
Posted - 2015.06.07 00:09:12 -
[225] - Quote
Felix Judge wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Diminishing returns on mechanics is one thing...diminishing returns on actually playing the game is entirely another thing.
That you cannot see a difference indicates you just are not thinking this through clearly. When two things are different, there may be reason to treat them differently - but it is not compelling, of course. If the principle is good for either, then of course it is okay to apply it to either. Demanding to treat differently just because of being two different things (or rather, finding one differentiating trait, which is probably always possible if you only look for it hard enough) shows that it was not me who has not thought it through clearly. I am of the opinion that diminshing returns are good for many activities - mining, ratting, setting/changing market orders, ... partly, because it encourages (but not forces) looking for alternatives, and mostly because that will hurt bots automatically without the need to find, scrutinize, evaluate, and ban bots manually. CCP would free up a lot of workforce for other things if game mechanics would hurt long-running bots automatically.
I am of the opinion that you are an idiot. Does that make you an idiot? No, really? Simply stating something is insufficient for making that statement true.
Gevlon is all over the place confusing ISK with wealth, mining with ratting and their implications for the economy and what not. And here you are thinking he's come up with some sort of shining jewel of an idea. Granted a broken clock and blind chicken thing is possible, but merely saying, "Yeah me too!" is not sufficient.
And as has been pointed out a policy to hurt bots that hurts non-bots is just bad. Embarrassingly bad. And people who log in for long periods of time and who make ISK consistently over that period of time...I'm pretty sure that CCP has their eye on them already. It should be the first step in even the most simple algorithms to find bot's and people who are using disallowed third party software. Think of it this way, suppose CCP found that a player with the first name Felix was botting. So then they want to ban this player, but they can't because they don't know the rest of his name. Solution...ban all players with the first name Felix. Good idea? Probably not.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Gevlon Goblin
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
423
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 04:24:54 -
[226] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:And as has been pointed out a policy to hurt bots that hurts non-bots is just bad. Embarrassingly bad. James 315 came up with a good name for such people: "bot-aspirants". Someone who does a trivial, repeatable activity for several hours every day is both hurting the other players with his excess ISK and hurting himself with his lack of priorities. Both should be saved.
My blog: greedygoblin.blogspot.com
|
HELLBOUNDMAN
Engineering Without Permits
226
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 05:56:30 -
[227] - Quote
How in the hell did this thread go 12 pages???
Am on on punked? Where's Ashton? I know you're here!!! |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1203
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 11:24:51 -
[228] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:And as has been pointed out a policy to hurt bots that hurts non-bots is just bad. Embarrassingly bad. James 315 came up with a good name for such people: "bot-aspirants". Someone who does a trivial, repeatable activity for several hours every day is both hurting the other players with his excess ISK and hurting himself with his lack of priorities. Both should be saved.
Well if you don't like these players doing what they enjoy I suggest the CODE path of removing their safety to do so, with anti-matter. This is a game and should not force players to carry out careers they do not wish to. If all they do is perform such 'bot-aspirant' tasks and generate ISK for themselves who cares? If they aren't using the ISK for anything else then it has no effect, if they use it to fund other activities such as PvP they provide targets. If they use the ISK for manufacturing/trade etc then they are providing a service.
The best solution for any bottable activity is to give an alternative where an active pilot will make more than an AFK one. So the comet mining idea for instance would reward an active pilot with more ISK generating products than an AFK miner would get (even with boosts).
This way the active pilots will provide content and gain better gameplay whilst the bots would simply take up the slack.
|
Gevlon Goblin
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
423
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 05:10:57 -
[229] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:The best solution for any bottable activity is to give an alternative where an active pilot will make more than an AFK one. So the comet mining idea for instance would reward an active pilot with more ISK generating products than an AFK miner would get (even with boosts). The problem is that bots aren't AFK. They are giving out orders to their ships constantly. They target new crosses/rocks, they dock, safe up. Anything that an EVE PvE player can do, a few lines of script can do too, maybe with a lower efficiency.
It's true, that it would be great if PvE would be so complex that bots wouldn't stand a chance, and players would be needed to solve them, but that's a dream never comes. We have to live with the reality.
My blog: greedygoblin.blogspot.com
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1212
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 09:42:01 -
[230] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:The best solution for any bottable activity is to give an alternative where an active pilot will make more than an AFK one. So the comet mining idea for instance would reward an active pilot with more ISK generating products than an AFK miner would get (even with boosts). The problem is that bots aren't AFK. They are giving out orders to their ships constantly. They target new crosses/rocks, they dock, safe up. Anything that an EVE PvE player can do, a few lines of script can do too, maybe with a lower efficiency. It's true, that it would be great if PvE would be so complex that bots wouldn't stand a chance, and players would be needed to solve them, but that's a dream never comes. We have to live with the reality.
My point is that you don't change the game mechanisms to combat bots in ways that are detrimental to non-bots. Remember that those you consider to have no life and play EvE for a long time each day may well do so because it is their entertainment. It is their choice to do so and the game mechanics should not discriminate against them for such.
Dev effort would be better spent in determining potential bot activity and pointing GM's towards those characters with their location. They can then be interacted with in game to asses whether they are a bot or not. Botting is a bannable offense as far as I'm aware and an active player would happily respond to repeated attempts to hail them.
Irrespective of your OP I would prefer their to be more active versions of the less active style careers that would reward an active player more. An active player should always have the advantage in the game. For instance in missions where a player can AFK rat maybe improve the AI slightly so that if NPC's are being killed in droves before getting anywhere near the player ship they fly the other way until they can warp to 0 on the player instead. I'm sure there are a multitude of simple changes that could be made in many areas and I feel this would improve the game overall rather than limit some areas in an arbitrary manner. |
|
Gevlon Goblin
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
423
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 05:00:10 -
[231] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:My point is that you don't change the game mechanisms to combat bots in ways that are detrimental to non-bots. Remember that those you consider to have no life and play EvE for a long time each day may well do so because it is their entertainment. It is their choice to do so and the game mechanics should not discriminate against them My point is that I consider no-lifers not much different from bots and a normal player can't tell the difference. They are both active for very-long time, doing some repeatable activity without interacting with other players. Bots and no-lifers alike are detrimental to normal players and should be stopped.
My blog: greedygoblin.blogspot.com
|
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
3692
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 05:16:47 -
[232] - Quote
I want to see the data that shows PLEX prices are related to alts, and not something else, like the sheer amount of DPS in high-sec.
Oh god.
|
Petre en Thielles
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
130
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 16:12:24 -
[233] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote: James 315 came up with a good name for such people: "bot-aspirants". Someone who does a trivial, repeatable activity for several hours every day is both hurting the other players with his excess ISK and hurting himself with his lack of priorities. Both should be saved.
Doing trivial, repeatable activities for hours every day....like ganking miners who can't fight back?
CODE, the biggest carebear alliance in EVE |
Gevlon Goblin
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
427
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 03:55:27 -
[234] - Quote
Petre en Thielles wrote:Doing trivial, repeatable activities for hours every day....like ganking miners who can't fight back?
CODE, the biggest carebear alliance in EVE This is PvP and CODE wins. The miners could fight back, if they were at the keyboard. They choose to leave their avatar floating in space without lead, because they get bored.
Maybe if their hours were limited, they would actually spend it playing.
My blog: greedygoblin.blogspot.com
|
Kenrailae
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
407
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 04:00:31 -
[235] - Quote
Riot Girl wrote:I want to see the data that shows PLEX prices are related to alts, and not something else, like the sheer amount of DPS in high-sec.
Well.... since incursions were introduced, Plex have pretty much done nothing but go up in price.... rather steeply.... I cannot link you a spreadsheet but I pretty clearly remember when they were thought a big deal at breaking 300m.... when Level 4's were the 'go to' for making isk.
The Law is a point of View
|
Felix Judge
Gallente Rebels Inc. Villore Accords
26
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 14:06:18 -
[236] - Quote
Kenrailae wrote:Riot Girl wrote:I want to see the data that shows PLEX prices are related to alts, and not something else, like the sheer amount of DPS in high-sec. Well.... since incursions were introduced, Plex have pretty much done nothing but go up in price.... rather steeply.... I cannot link you a spreadsheet but I pretty clearly remember when they were thought a big deal at breaking 300m.... when Level 4's were the 'go to' for making isk. Incursionists do make ISK, but they mostly make LP. They must convert LP to ISK by selling those items. So the total ISK-income from incursions depends on the prevalence of ISK in the game. Obviously, this in turn is dependent upon the availability of ISK via botting and bot-likle playing. In other words, incursions' impact on PLEX prices is dependent on ISK amount from other sources still. The main point of this thread still is that bots can generate wealth by not playing, and that is easily counterable with diminishing returns on hour-long repetetive behaviour. It also is an automatic counter that needs no manual surveillance at all from the anti-botting crew from CCP. They can concentrate on the harder-to-spot cases. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
1355
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 14:34:24 -
[237] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:My point is that you don't change the game mechanisms to combat bots in ways that are detrimental to non-bots. Remember that those you consider to have no life and play EvE for a long time each day may well do so because it is their entertainment. It is their choice to do so and the game mechanics should not discriminate against them My point is that I consider no-lifers not much different from bots and a normal player can't tell the difference. They are both active for very-long time, doing some repeatable activity without interacting with other players. Bots and no-lifers alike are detrimental to normal players and should be stopped.
Again with the term no-lifers. Who are you to tell someone how little or how much they can play a game? It is after all just that, a game. If they have their fun doing what they do then they are a happy customer for CCP. CCP would be better tracking and booting out bots rather than changing gameplay to limit what people can do. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1609
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 14:42:00 -
[238] - Quote
Oh look, it's the "delayed response because everyone is ignoring my thread" bump. Again.
Quit feeding the troll for the love of all that is good and right. |
Petre en Thielles
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
183
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 14:54:15 -
[239] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote: This is PvP and CODE wins. The miners could fight back, if they were at the keyboard. They choose to leave their avatar floating in space without lead, because they get bored.
Maybe if their hours were limited, they would actually spend it playing.
You seemed to have not read what I wrote.
"Someone who does a trivial, repeatable activity for several hours every day"
Is a perfect way to describe someone who mindlessly blows up ships they know can't fight back.
CODE, biggest bear alliance in EVE. |
James Baboli
Novablasters
969
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 17:31:58 -
[240] - Quote
Felix Judge wrote:Kenrailae wrote:Riot Girl wrote:I want to see the data that shows PLEX prices are related to alts, and not something else, like the sheer amount of DPS in high-sec. Well.... since incursions were introduced, Plex have pretty much done nothing but go up in price.... rather steeply.... I cannot link you a spreadsheet but I pretty clearly remember when they were thought a big deal at breaking 300m.... when Level 4's were the 'go to' for making isk. Incursionists do make ISK, but they mostly make LP. They must convert LP to ISK by selling those items. So the total ISK-income from incursions depends on the prevalence of ISK in the game. Obviously, this in turn is dependent upon the availability of ISK via botting and bot-likle playing. In other words, incursions' impact on PLEX prices is dependent on ISK amount from other sources still. The main point of this thread still is that bots can generate wealth by not playing, and that is easily counterable with diminishing returns on hour-long repetetive behaviour. It also is an automatic counter that needs no manual surveillance at all from the anti-botting crew from CCP. They can concentrate on the harder-to-spot cases. Hqs pay out 31.5m isk per site. They pay out 7k lp, for which the going rate is about 1.1k per lp
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
|
Lan Wang
V I R I I
921
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 17:39:47 -
[241] - Quote
zomg what a threadnaught this silly idea has created
EVEALON Creative - Logo Design & Branding | Digital Design
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
3036
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 18:00:44 -
[242] - Quote
Gevlon Goblin wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:And as has been pointed out a policy to hurt bots that hurts non-bots is just bad. Embarrassingly bad. James 315 came up with a good name for such people: "bot-aspirants". Someone who does a trivial, repeatable activity for several hours every day is both hurting the other players with his excess ISK and hurting himself with his lack of priorities. Both should be saved.
This is simply not true at all.
A player who logs in and semi-AFK mines while watching a movie on Netflix/DVD, or is doing work is not hurting anyone let alone the Eve economy. In fact, the basic idea of an economy and trade is mutually beneficial transactions. This is a very elementary aspect of economics. The seller would rather have the money, most likely so he can go buy something he wants more than what he is selling, and buyer wants the item more than the money. This is true in real life, and it is true in this game. To suggest that somebody who is engaging in economic activity in Eve is hurting the game is errant nonsense.
Further, several types of game play have been designed, on purpose, to be repeatable and fairly trivial. So, why is anyone shocked, upset or butthurt that somebody isGǪrepeating these aspects of the game? Since it was done this way on purpose by the developers nobody should be shocked or upset.
And mining does not create ISK. This is another place you fall flat on your face and demonstrate you just donGÇÖt understand even the most fundamental and basic aspects of the in game economy. Mining takes an unusable resource (asteroids) and turns them into something that can be used to make things in game. At no point in this process is ISK created. ISK is merely moved from one wallet to another, and in fact there is an ISK sink when the results of mining is sold on the market (the transaction tax).
Now, if your gripe is that some players have too much ISK in their wallets then that is an entirely different issue. Now you are talking about income/wealth inequality and you and James315 should not be so goddamned intellectually lazy (or maybe you are both just really stupid) and tell us why income/wealth inequality is bad in this game. I could see it if maybe you could use your in game wealth to buy influence with the Devs or something, but that is just a laughable concept.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
Teckos Pech
The Executives Executive Outcomes
3036
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 18:07:40 -
[243] - Quote
Kenrailae wrote:Riot Girl wrote:I want to see the data that shows PLEX prices are related to alts, and not something else, like the sheer amount of DPS in high-sec. Well.... since incursions were introduced, Plex have pretty much done nothing but go up in price.... rather steeply.... I cannot link you a spreadsheet but I pretty clearly remember when they were thought a big deal at breaking 300m.... when Level 4's were the 'go to' for making isk.
I think this is post-hoc-ergo-propter-hoc reasoning. While incursions are an isk source, they are not the largest isk source. That is, if we removed incursions I doubt PLEX prices would decline. The rate at which they go up might slow, but the real issue is that there is a staggering amount of ISK entering the game via null sec ratting.
If you have large amounts of currency creation prices will go up. In this instance the price of PLEX is what is going up.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence
So Local Chat vanished, now what?
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: [one page] |