| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 31 post(s) |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1399
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 21:11:31 -
[1] - Quote
This is pretty cool to be finally happening. That said I'm still not feeling much desire to invest since the ships I actually fly (mostly tech 2 ships) seem to still lack options.
Another issue that comes to mind, is there a way to have owned ships become skins to be sold rather than applied other than putting them in a corp hangar? |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1399
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 21:20:48 -
[2] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:This is pretty cool to be finally happening. That said I'm still not feeling much desire to invest since the ships I actually fly (mostly tech 2 ships) seem to still lack options.
Another issue that comes to mind, is there a way to have owned ships become skins to be sold rather than applied other than putting them in a corp hangar? They're going to be dropped into your redemption queue, so you can then redeem them and sell them? Quote:Skinned ships will become a base version of the same and a SKIN item for that skin will be added to the owning players redeeming queue. For example: If you have a Megathron Quafe Edition you will get a standard Megathron in the same location as the original, and 1 Megathron Quafe SKIN (Permanent) item placed in your redeeming queue. Ah, I misunderstood somehow and thought they were being directly applied to the character. |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1400
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 23:56:05 -
[3] - Quote
Magosian wrote:Ned Thomas wrote:Think about how many there are in game currently versus other skins that are NOT site drops. If I do that, the only thing I can conclude is CCP/Aurum moneygrab. I should probably state that I happen to have a few of these, and while it might appear that I'm trying to milk their worth, I'm really not. As you said, there are tons floating around; they're far from rare. It just sticks out like a sore thumb when ONLY these are temporary, and seem to contradict the whole concept of having a skinnable options in the first place. Maybe a better question would be: what is CCP wanting to avoid if these were to become permanent? How can there be a money grab for something that isn't obtainable with money? That's really the fundamental difference there.
Since Aur prices are static the permanent skins retain their value to an extent, either because demand will meet the price point or suppliers stop supplying more of that item on the markets once it stops returning favorably. Since the skins being made temporary come from in game drops there is no such behavioral supply constraint so they need to be consumed to retain their value as new stock is found in game. This works out in favor of those finding them since demand for the skins will refresh every 30 days. Basically CCP isn't milking anyone but rather keeping those who are finding the skins in business long term. |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1400
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 00:03:49 -
[4] - Quote
Natya Mebelle wrote:I still wonder if it would not have been better to keep the skins around their old price but instead of making them unlock on account, they are like modules which you slot into a new slot on the ship. You could have exchanged the skins on that compatible ship as you would have seen fit, so you could either risk them or not, by leaving the skin in station.
This would have cleared up the market as well but still kept the skins in the category of "destructible item" like anything else in Eve... okay, except the golden pod.
I'm still debating which way would have been better. Spending much more money on a permanent skin, or paying less money for a possible destruction.
But wait... what... if BOTH could be done? You know, options are awesome? Maybe food for thought for future updates c: Maybe this decision came about by observing the willingness of people to fly with skinned ships. Considering the relative skin to hull cost I'd imagine loss was a potential factor limiting adoption, thus this addresses that while leaving the skins with their same relative value. |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1401
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 00:36:57 -
[5] - Quote
Dangeresque Too wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:Natya Mebelle wrote:I still wonder if it would not have been better to keep the skins around their old price but instead of making them unlock on account, they are like modules which you slot into a new slot on the ship. You could have exchanged the skins on that compatible ship as you would have seen fit, so you could either risk them or not, by leaving the skin in station.
This would have cleared up the market as well but still kept the skins in the category of "destructible item" like anything else in Eve... okay, except the golden pod.
I'm still debating which way would have been better. Spending much more money on a permanent skin, or paying less money for a possible destruction.
But wait... what... if BOTH could be done? You know, options are awesome? Maybe food for thought for future updates c: Maybe this decision came about by observing the willingness of people to fly with skinned ships. Considering the relative skin to hull cost I'd imagine loss was a potential factor limiting adoption, thus this addresses that while leaving the skins with their same relative value. Though they didn't exactly implement an "easy to use" test system, as you had to un-rig your ship in order to apply the skin... and I don't know many people that went so far to do that, or to buy a completely secondary ship and put a 2nd set of rigs on it. So their test use case data was flawed to begin with. And then they went a completely different direction... As it so happens this solution addresses both of those issues. It works around loss and rig issues since it doesn't require ship repackaging. Still, since the skins concentrated on tech 1 ships where disposability is most commonly a factor I can't see the loss of the skin not being a factor under the current system.
Someone whelping thoraxes or ganking in catalysts would likely find the current system prohibitive without even encountering rigging issues. The incoming system allows you to more feasibly die in style. |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1401
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 00:52:04 -
[6] - Quote
Magosian wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:How can there be a money grab for something that isn't obtainable with money? That's really the fundamental difference there. The moneygrab is in essentially gutting the allure from the "common" BC/dessy ship skins because they'll be temporary, to the much more fascinating (also, rare as hell now, rare as hell in the foreseeable future) Aurum-provided perma-skins. Their scarcity provides their value, their permanence reduces their value. If the become permanent that's a character whose demand is permanently fulfilled. After enough characters have them there is diminished demand for more, with that demand further diminishing as prices drop accordingly. Making them temporary preserves the market.
Giving incentive for the aur market is a flawed argument. The aur market will largely be determined by isk:aur return and diminishing velocity since that market is pretty much set up to saturate. Making the in game ones temporary does a lot of nothing to change that for the actual cash buyers. |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1401
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 01:03:14 -
[7] - Quote
Dangeresque Too wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:Someone whelping thoraxes or ganking in catalysts would likely find the current system prohibitive without even encountering rigging issues. The incoming system allows you to more feasibly die in style. Except in most cases with the common skins they were only a few million at most, so losing a Nug Merlin was just another Merlin. Now on the other hand you can spend more than you would to PLEX your account for an entire month. In addition to creating an unsustainable market condition in which you have increasingly smaller target audience. Having the SKIN as a rig or module slot would keep the market sustainable. And if they went with a module slot option (or even a specialized SKIN slot) then you would be able to remove it or exchange it for a different one, so the risk of loss wouldn't be as heavy. I'm not sure how a merlin at 10x the price is just another merlin. Your entire argument seems based on the idea that the cost differences are trivial when proportionally they aren't. Neither of the use cases I mentioned are actually addressed by this at all.
And while you do correctly nail the point of sustainability, allowing for greater adoption though permanence widens the potential audience and increases use which becomes it's own advertizing. If most people only skin ships they almost never lose for cost reasons, or worse just don't skin ships for the same reason, you still have a sustainability issue with sales. If that's already the case then you don't lose much by making them more attractive to a wider range of buyers. |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1401
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 01:06:32 -
[8] - Quote
Magosian wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:...Making them temporary preserves the market.... This is where we have vastly different conclusions then. I, for one, would never buy a skin that is temporary, and thus it becomes entirely worthless, at least to me. Then you aren't the intended market for those skins. The value is preserved over time for those who do want them renewing their ability to use them, thus they can withstand a smaller pool of potential buyers and come out ahead long term. |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1402
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 01:18:11 -
[9] - Quote
Ned Thomas wrote:Also, why are we assuming that the skins will make ships more valuable to kill or lose?
You won't be able to BUY the ships with skins on them, there is no LOSS of the skin when the ship dies, and (outside of color scheme) there is no difference between, say, a Quafe Tristan and a Standard Tristan. There will be a rarity factor, sure, but it won't show up in the final value of the ship.
And who's to say these things will show up on killmails in the first place? EDIT: Forgot it was in the dev blog. The skins won't show on killmails initially, but it'll be added later. We aren't making the assumption they will in the soon to be implemented skin system; I made the assumption, backed up by pre announcement market prices, that they currently are more expensive and will be until the change is made unless I'm missing a part of the conversation. |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1402
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 01:31:42 -
[10] - Quote
Ned Thomas wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:Ned Thomas wrote:Also, why are we assuming that the skins will make ships more valuable to kill or lose?
You won't be able to BUY the ships with skins on them, there is no LOSS of the skin when the ship dies, and (outside of color scheme) there is no difference between, say, a Quafe Tristan and a Standard Tristan. There will be a rarity factor, sure, but it won't show up in the final value of the ship.
And who's to say these things will show up on killmails in the first place? EDIT: Forgot it was in the dev blog. The skins won't show on killmails initially, but it'll be added later. We aren't making the assumption they will in the soon to be implemented skin system; I made the assumption, backed up by pre announcement market prices, that they currently are more expensive and will be until the change is made unless I'm missing a part of the conversation. Let's take a Sebiestor Hurricane as an example. Under the new system, after I buy the skin, I will buy a regular run of the mill Hurricane and apply the skin to it. When I leave the ship, it goes back to being a regular run of the mill Hurricane until I get back in it. If someone manages to kill me, I'll just go buy another regular run of the mill Hurricane as that's all I've lost. I haven't actually lost the Sebiestor Hurricane. Further, there will be no way for me to buy a "Sebiestor Hurricane" on the market, so there's no way to assess the value of that ship versus the value of the run of the mill Hurricane. So there's no actual value added to the ship. There's no market to determine the value from. I don't see why there would be added value reflected in kills or losses of skinned ships. Repeated for emphasis: "We aren't making the assumption they will in the soon to be implemented skin system" |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1402
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 04:03:29 -
[11] - Quote
Oraac Ensor wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:Magosian wrote:Ned Thomas wrote:Think about how many there are in game currently versus other skins that are NOT site drops. If I do that, the only thing I can conclude is CCP/Aurum moneygrab. I should probably state that I happen to have a few of these, and while it might appear that I'm trying to milk their worth, I'm really not. As you said, there are tons floating around; they're far from rare. It just sticks out like a sore thumb when ONLY these are temporary, and seem to contradict the whole concept of having a skinnable options in the first place. Maybe a better question would be: what is CCP wanting to avoid if these were to become permanent? How can there be a money grab for something that isn't obtainable with money? That's really the fundamental difference there. Please tell us how to acquire Aurum without paying money GÇô I'm sure that I can't be the only one who would dearly like to know. The skins being discussed there, the temporary pirate skins, are not sold for aur but found in game.
They even say loot drop when listed in the blog. |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1404
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 23:13:27 -
[12] - Quote
Some time back I remember there being some buzz around marauder skins on sisi. Any idea when/if those could hit TQ? Or did they do so already and I missed them completely? |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1434
|
Posted - 2015.04.30 21:27:18 -
[13] - Quote
CCP Darwin wrote:Brian Harrelstein wrote:I wish the skins could be used on other ships... Inner Zone Shipping freighters anyone? :) The main reason that isn't the case so far is that we have only released SKIN licenses that correspond to existing faction/ship combinations that have been validated by our QA folks. Internally, the Space Object Factory engine can build a renderable ship with any combination of factions/materials and ship type. However, because certain combinations may not match up properly (one example is if a faction or material combination assumes the underlying ship has two material types and the actual ship in question has three) it's possible to get a ship out the other end that looks like a mistake has been made, or has undesirable combinations of original and skinned materials. It is, however, possible that at some point there could be SKIN licenses that are designed and intended to look good on all ships. CCP Terminus would know more about whether there are concrete plans in that area. Would it be possible to see any comments on plans for T2 ship skins?
For instance, will we ever see more general licenses for say, a given T1 ship and it's variants? Or is the foreseeable plan to continue with each hull and variant having it's own skin?
Also while I understand the need for QA, I feel as if the current ship selection leaves a lot to be desired for pilots who have largely come to depend upon the more advanced ship lines in game excluding only, oddly enough, miners.
Pretty much just waiting to for the right words from you get my participation. |
| |
|