Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1493
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 02:25:18 -
[301] - Quote
Thing is, i could fix your main objection to boosts just by never logging on my pvp alt agains, and only using my booster main.
I have enough kills to not crave any more.
As for being able to pull logi, etc 24/7. I know corps that can ping on jabber and get a 250 man fleet at any time of day. Are we really counting if any of them are alts or does it even matter?
I personally dont care what other people do and how many toons they have. I judge situations based on what happens in game, not what happens in sweaty seats sat upon by naked men.
Each to their own though.
Now you are calling scouts and logi alts into question as p2w?
I really have to ask if you are playing the correct game.
Also, you are seamlessly continuing on from where legatus left off. Did you really just burn your gallente spy in order to make it seem like there are 2 people in this game that think alts are p2w? |
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
555
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 03:22:10 -
[302] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:Thing is, i could fix your main objection to boosts just by never logging on my pvp alt agains, and only using my booster main.
I have enough kills to not crave any more.
As for being able to pull logi, etc 24/7. I know corps that can ping on jabber and get a 250 man fleet at any time of day. Are we really counting if any of them are alts or does it even matter?
I personally dont care what other people do and how many toons they have. I judge situations based on what happens in game, not what happens in sweaty seats sat upon by naked men.
Each to their own though.
Now you are calling scouts and logi alts into question as p2w?
I really have to ask if you are playing the correct game.
Also, you are seamlessly continuing on from where legatus left off. Did you really just burn your gallente spy in order to make it seem like there are 2 people in this game that think alts are p2w?
Calmil doesn't need spies. They have Snuff on batphone.
I mostly agree with Legatus and I was bored.
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1493
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 03:34:56 -
[303] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Calmil doesn't need spies. They have Snuff on batphone but did get stomped tonight anyway.
I mostly agree with Legatus 'my alt' and I was bored.
Ok. |
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
555
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 03:45:24 -
[304] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Calmil doesn't need spies. They have Snuff on batphone but did get stomped tonight anyway.
I mostly agree with Legatus 'my alt' and I was bored.
Ok.
I wasn't on tonight. Link battle report.
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1493
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 03:50:05 -
[305] - Quote
http://evf-eve.com/services/brcat/?s=45337,45332&b=6619490&e=90&t=4zbaaiuf&r=1
Vid incoming once cleared. |
Zsha
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 06:47:44 -
[306] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote:[quote=Demerius Xenocratus] Pay to win = one player having a tangible advantage that theyes paid real world money for.
I say more PLAYERS in space is what we should strive for. I do not desire a game where I'm in competition with 5000 bittervets and 20000 alts. At that point the game becomes an RTS with individuals moving multiple complementary units around the grid.
WORD. REMOVE OFF GRIND LINKS AND BOOSTS. KTHXBAI
|
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
555
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 07:22:00 -
[307] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:http://evf-eve.com/services/brcat/?s=45337,45332&b=6619490&e=90&t=4zbaaiuf&r=1
Vid incoming once cleared.
Looks like a good furball with some third party action but Galmil/calmil losses look roughly equal?
Maybe I misread it?
|
Deryn Angrard
Spooks On Pings Project.Mayhem.
65
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 09:06:50 -
[308] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote:http://evf-eve.com/services/brcat/?s=45337,45332&b=6619490&e=90&t=4zbaaiuf&r=1
Vid incoming once cleared. Looks like a good furball with some third party action but Galmil/calmil losses look roughly equal? Maybe I misread it?
You didn't misread it. It was a mess of a fight, where nobody had idea who was fighting who. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1493
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 13:36:08 -
[309] - Quote
Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote:http://evf-eve.com/services/brcat/?s=45337,45332&b=6619490&e=90&t=4zbaaiuf&r=1
Vid incoming once cleared. Looks like a good furball with some third party action but Galmil/calmil losses look roughly equal? Maybe I misread it?
Nah, we were slaughtering squids, then 2 other parties arrived and mainly focused on us. Squids pretty much only w****d on project meyhems kills. It was also interesting that PM didnt land a single cal mil kill but were taking squids word that they were not blue (which they were) ;) |
Civ Kado
Dutch East Querious Company Phoebe Freeport Republic
94
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 15:30:40 -
[310] - Quote
remind me why they haven't been made into booster drugs? oh right, more alts more money. |
|
Legatus1982
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
12
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 17:59:49 -
[311] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:Demerius Xenocratus wrote:Calmil doesn't need spies. They have Snuff on batphone but did get stomped tonight anyway.
I mostly agree with Legatus 'my alt' and I was bored.
Ok.
According to you this is not different from just having two players posting in a threadanyways so why would it matter even if it were true? |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1493
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 19:30:23 -
[312] - Quote
Basing your arguments on peoples behavior rather than the mechanics in a computer game is a horrible way to complain about something.
mechanics dictate behavior and alts are accepted. So, live ive said many times, focus on changes to the mechanics that will lead to the behaviors that in your opinion is how eve should be played.
Though, since you still wont understand this i have very little faith that your opinions on how eve should be played will line up with many other people. |
Gully Alex Foyle
Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop
4039
|
Posted - 2015.08.03 21:12:51 -
[313] - Quote
Odd thing about warfare links is that they're one-sided bonuses, with no penalties.
I mean like skirmish links dropping your resists or armor links cutting your speed.
Seems strange that so much effort is put into ship balancing and forcing interesting fitting choices, then if you have a good booster (or several) in fleet it's just +20-30% to (almost) anything. Including stuff that I assume is quite carefully balanced pre-links, such as weapon ranges vs. web and scram/point ranges (unless pimp mods), for example.
This also makes it so, with few exceptions, links 'best outcome playstyle' is simply 'train to V, full skirmish + shield or armor, activate!'. A bit dull?
Make space glamorous!
Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!
|
Legatus1982
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
13
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 01:48:33 -
[314] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:Basing your arguments on peoples behavior rather than the mechanics in a computer game is a horrible way to complain about something.
mechanics dictate behavior and alts are accepted. So, live ive said many times, focus on changes to the mechanics that will lead to the behaviors that in your opinion is how eve should be played.
Though, since you still wont understand this i have very little faith that your opinions on how eve should be played will line up with many other people.
Arbitrarily deciding that behavior "doesn't count" isn't a very good argument, on the other hand.
Evading concord while killing non-hostiles in highsec is a behavior that was ruled an exploit. On the other hand, hyperdunking was not considered an exploit. These are both behavior based decisions, not mechanics based situations requiring changes to the game.
Behavior is something that cannot always be controlled with mechanics and does need to be accounted for with any changes you have in mind.
In the case of links, the mechanic itself is a good idea, but the nature of the game of eve online where alts are plentiful (because of the training system and CCP's stance on the issue) means that when you have a mechanic like links, people will use alts almost exclusively for that role. I know you want this to not matter, but it does. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1493
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 02:53:29 -
[315] - Quote
They always fix mechanics to prevent known exploits. |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
675
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 14:06:55 -
[316] - Quote
People are not exploiting the mechanic, they are using boosting links exactly as they were meant to be used. Just because they are using an alt does not mean they are exploiting a game mechanic. The same effect would be gained if the they had a friend providing the boosting links.
I have a boosting alt. It did not start out as a boosting alt. It started out as a JF alt. Once I got that maxed out, I figured I mine as well train it to do other things.
You know why I trained a boosting alt? Because people were always complaining about other fleets having links, and we didn't; or people had links, but just would not fly them. Why? Because flying links is not fun. |
Legatus1982
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
13
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 14:50:05 -
[317] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:They always fix mechanics to prevent known exploits.
So you're saying concord now instantly blows up your ship leaving no openings for exploits? That's interesting. Because I know otherwise.
How about rmt? Did they fix that? Because people can currently rmt all they want and in fact it is supported through the ease of the plex system. Funny how they only change mechanics when it benefits their wallets. |
Legatus1982
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
13
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 14:58:10 -
[318] - Quote
Estella Osoka wrote:People are not exploiting the mechanic, they are using boosting links exactly as they were meant to be used. Just because they are using an alt does not mean they are exploiting a game mechanic. The same effect would be gained if the they had a friend providing the boosting links.
I have a boosting alt. It did not start out as a boosting alt. It started out as a JF alt. Once I got that maxed out, I figured I mine as well train it to do other things.
You know why I trained a boosting alt? Because people were always complaining about other fleets having links, and we didn't; or people had links, but just would not fly them. Why? Because flying links is not fun.
So what you're saying is you COULDN'T get someone to fly links for you, then became forced to use your second paid account for links to be competitive with other fleet links.
But this is not p2w... lol
Can't make this stuff up if I tried |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1494
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 16:51:27 -
[319] - Quote
Legatus1982 wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote:They always fix mechanics to prevent known exploits. So you're saying concord now instantly blows up your ship leaving no openings for exploits? That's interesting. Because I know otherwise. How about rmt? Did they fix that? Because people can currently rmt all they want and in fact it is supported through the ease of the plex system. Funny how they only change mechanics when it benefits their wallets.
Concord are not supposed to blow up your ship instantly. However, it is now not possible to escape system with your ship intact through a wormhole etc.
RMT isnt an exploit, its a breach of the EULA and not related to any exploited game mechanics. People might abuse game mechanics to facilitate certain stages of the process but those acts themselves are not exploits.
Im pretty sure you are impaired. Theres not a single definition you have used correctly in this entire thread.
Im seriously, gb2wow. |
Yuri Antollare
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
119
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 17:34:29 -
[320] - Quote
Yes. No. Depends how long you've been playing EVE.
Describe the role of alts in EVE to any other gamers and yes, it is classic P2W, I doubt there are more clear cut examples from other games. Like some dude said, pay RL money, gain in game advantage, doesn't have to be any more complicated or convoluted.
But, as you said, the entirety of the game is, TBH, built on P2W. In EVE, paying 30$ a month will give you vast advantages over someone paying 15$, this is not true for other games where trying to run two copies of a shooter/RTS/arcade/racing will hinder more than help.
This comes down to the fact that 'playing' EVE is really too easy. The idea of running two accounts/copies of the game (or more) is a joke in other games because the ordinary functioning of your character/ship requires far more skill and attention than it does in EVE. Aiming, movement, attention, consider the thought of running two copies of BF4, ridiculously impossible.
In comparison EVE is built for the older player, those tired of being upstaged by 'twitch skill' (being able to react quicker and more precisely, what plebian attributes!) Its not about how well you can aim, its about the tracking figure in a spreadsheet. Crosi is right, ?, mechanics largely drive behaviour. Increase the difficulty of operating a toon doing anything and you will see less multiboxing (mini hacking games to keep your boosts running would be a fantastic well of tears.) Though at this point the playerbase might only be left with older gamers, tired of the fight, slowly accumulating resources to stomp on new people, you'd might only end up driving away the only people that want to play this game. |
|
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
677
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 20:20:57 -
[321] - Quote
You know what? If you jump into a system, see 2 other people there, one is in a enyo in a small plex, the other is sitting on station undock in a Damnation, and you still decide to go into the small plex to engage the Enyo; then you deserve what you get.
Instead, add that Damnation pilot and the Enyo pilot to your watch list and avoid him.
After all PVP is mostly about target selection. You know what your ship can do, you know what your opponent's ship can do, and you make a decision on whether or not you can engage him and win.
You don't like people who use links, then don't engage the people who use them. Deny them their PVP fix and they will either quit or put up their link alt and fight like everyone else. |
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1494
|
Posted - 2015.08.04 21:00:48 -
[322] - Quote
Yuri Antollare wrote:This comes down to the fact that 'playing' EVE is really too easy. The idea of running two accounts/copies of the game (or more) is a joke in other games because the ordinary functioning of your character/ship requires far more skill and attention than it does in EVE. Aiming, movement, attention, consider the thought of running two copies of BF4, ridiculously impossible.
Fact is though, having 2 accounts running BF4 isnt p2w either. Even if it was possible for someone to competently dualbox it.
Golden ammo on a single account in world of tanks is pay to win. Pay to win is a specific business model to allow a single player who is willing to pay money to gain an advantage over another single player who doesnt.
Running 2 accounts is skill, not p2w. Perhaps its a much less skill level to dualbox EVE than it would be to in BF4, but expanding the definition of p2w on that basis really just makes having definitions for things meaningless.
Which brings me back to the fact that i sympathise with people who say boosts are lame. There is an argument to be had there. But arguing that booster alts are p2w is just non factual. |
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
564
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 02:46:37 -
[323] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:Pay to win is a specific business model to allow a single player who is willing to pay money to gain an advantage over another single player who doesnt.
|
Aerasia
Republic University Minmatar Republic
65
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 03:07:50 -
[324] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:Pay to win is a specific business model to allow a single player who is willing to pay money to gain an advantage over another single player who doesnt. Tell me... how does a single player overcome the disadvantage presented by a booster alt? If I'm not allowed to bring a friend, I don't see how alts aren't P2W.
|
Yang Aurilen
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
748
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 03:42:00 -
[325] - Quote
It's fair if I have a friend semi-afk in a link ship fleet up with me to give me boost and it's pay2win if I have my own link alt that I have to move myself in case of danger. It's fair if I have a corpmate with a jump freighter haul stuff for me for free to our home system and it's pay2win if I have my own JF alt. It's fair if I ask my alliancemate to light a cyno for me to do cyno-related stuff but it's pay2win if I have my own cyno alt doing cyno related stuff. It's fair if I have a corpmate in a cloaky falcon to make someone cry and it's pay2win to have a cloaky falcon alt.
All the stuff I've read the past few pages has been a strong case of sour grapes to be fair.
Oh here's another one: It's fair if I bring my friends to a fight to help me and blob2win if the other side has more friends than my side.
Post with your NPC alt main and not your main main alt!
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1494
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 04:06:41 -
[326] - Quote
Yang Aurilen wrote:It's fair if I have a friend semi-afk in a link ship fleet up with me to give me boost and it's pay2win if I have my own link alt that I have to move myself in case of danger. It's fair if I have a corpmate with a jump freighter haul stuff for me for free to our home system and it's pay2win if I have my own JF alt. It's fair if I ask my alliancemate to light a cyno for me to do cyno-related stuff but it's pay2win if I have my own cyno alt doing cyno related stuff. It's fair if I have a corpmate in a cloaky falcon to make someone cry and it's pay2win to have a cloaky falcon alt.
All the stuff I've read the past few pages has been a strong case of sour grapes to be fair.
Oh here's another one: It's fair if I bring my friends to a fight to help me and blob2win if the other side has more friends than my side.
This is clearly not the correct game for you.
Aerasia wrote:Crosi Wesdo wrote:Pay to win is a specific business model to allow a single player who is willing to pay money to gain an advantage over another single player who doesnt. Tell me... how does a single player overcome the disadvantage presented by a booster alt? If I'm not allowed to bring a friend, I don't see how alts aren't P2W.
Wow, but you ARE allowed to bring a friend lol...
And you bringing a friend is no different to me bringning an alt, be it on field with extra dps/ewar or off grid with boosts.
With the suggestons made in this thread, you could just bring a friend with probes and deny me the ability to use my boosts. I do realise that asking scrubs to make some effort in this game is like kryptonite to them. |
Yuri Antollare
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
121
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 04:18:21 -
[327] - Quote
Yang Aurilen wrote:It's fair if I have a friend semi-afk in a link ship fleet up with me to give me boost and it's pay2win if I have my own link alt that I have to move myself in case of danger. It's fair if I have a corpmate with a jump freighter haul stuff for me for free to our home system and it's pay2win if I have my own JF alt. It's fair if I ask my alliancemate to light a cyno for me to do cyno-related stuff but it's pay2win if I have my own cyno alt doing cyno related stuff. It's fair if I have a corpmate in a cloaky falcon to make someone cry and it's pay2win to have a cloaky falcon alt.
All the stuff I've read the past few pages has been a strong case of sour grapes to be fair.
Oh here's another one: It's fair if I bring my friends to a fight to help me and blob2win if the other side has more friends than my side.
Yes, yes and yes? Everytime a soloer bitches and moans about people taking the easy road the response is 'its an MMO.'
The guy paying one subscription has to ask/form relations with other real players to engage in any of your examples (links, cyno, hauling.) In that view of the universe he is actually engaging in an MMO, his advantages over other individuals are accrued through working with other real people.
The alternative, the current reality, the player can simply double/triple/10x the amount of money he puts into the game, and now he can bypass the entire need to form relations with anyone with no apparent downside, in fact in many examples multiboxing is more efficient/performs better than having multiple real people controlling individual toons.
There is no need to 'expand' the definition of P2W here. EVE favors those with more numbers, a good MMO, you can achieve the end result by either being sociable and engaging in MMO things, or you can simpy dump more money into CCP coffers and achieve the same (if not a better) result.
"Pay to win is a specific business model to allow a single player who is willing to pay money to gain an advantage over another single player who doesnt."
Any further definition is not needed. If it was the case that paying for a second copy of BF4 enabled you to run two players side by side, and the result was an advantage over someone only running one copy, then you have clear cut P2W. 'Golden ammo' is a nice easy to visualize example, but in no meaningful way is it distinct from other examples of P2W.
|
Crosi Wesdo
War and Order
1494
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 04:25:52 -
[328] - Quote
Yuri Antollare wrote:Yang Aurilen wrote:It's fair if I have a friend semi-afk in a link ship fleet up with me to give me boost and it's pay2win if I have my own link alt that I have to move myself in case of danger. It's fair if I have a corpmate with a jump freighter haul stuff for me for free to our home system and it's pay2win if I have my own JF alt. It's fair if I ask my alliancemate to light a cyno for me to do cyno-related stuff but it's pay2win if I have my own cyno alt doing cyno related stuff. It's fair if I have a corpmate in a cloaky falcon to make someone cry and it's pay2win to have a cloaky falcon alt.
All the stuff I've read the past few pages has been a strong case of sour grapes to be fair.
Oh here's another one: It's fair if I bring my friends to a fight to help me and blob2win if the other side has more friends than my side. Yes, yes and yes? Everytime a soloer bitches and moans about people taking the easy road the response is 'its an MMO.' The guy paying one subscription has to ask/form relations with other real players to engage in any of your examples (links, cyno, hauling.) In that view of the universe he is actually engaging in an MMO, his advantages over other individuals are accrued through working with other real people. The alternative, the current reality, the player can simply double/triple/10x the amount of money he puts into the game, and now he can bypass the entire need to form relations with anyone with no apparent downside, in fact in many examples multiboxing is more efficient/performs better than having multiple real people controlling individual toons. There is no need to 'expand' the definition of P2W here. EVE favors those with more numbers, a good MMO, you can achieve the end result by either being sociable and engaging in MMO things, or you can simpy dump more money into CCP coffers and achieve the same (if not a better) result. "Pay to win is a specific business model to allow a single player who is willing to pay money to gain an advantage over another single player who doesnt." Any further definition is not needed. If it was the case that paying for a second copy of BF4 enabled you to run two players side by side, and the result was an advantage over someone only running one copy, then you have clear cut P2W. 'Golden ammo' is a nice easy to visualize example, but in no meaningful way is it distinct from other examples of P2W.
Massove strawman. Ive destroyed the P2W argument without sayng MMO a single time. |
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
565
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 04:37:44 -
[329] - Quote
Yuri Antollare wrote:Yang Aurilen wrote:It's fair if I have a friend semi-afk in a link ship fleet up with me to give me boost and it's pay2win if I have my own link alt that I have to move myself in case of danger. It's fair if I have a corpmate with a jump freighter haul stuff for me for free to our home system and it's pay2win if I have my own JF alt. It's fair if I ask my alliancemate to light a cyno for me to do cyno-related stuff but it's pay2win if I have my own cyno alt doing cyno related stuff. It's fair if I have a corpmate in a cloaky falcon to make someone cry and it's pay2win to have a cloaky falcon alt.
All the stuff I've read the past few pages has been a strong case of sour grapes to be fair.
Oh here's another one: It's fair if I bring my friends to a fight to help me and blob2win if the other side has more friends than my side. Yes, yes and yes? Everytime a soloer bitches and moans about people taking the easy road the response is 'its an MMO.' The guy paying one subscription has to ask/form relations with other real players to engage in any of your examples (links, cyno, hauling.) In that view of the universe he is actually engaging in an MMO, his advantages over other individuals are accrued through working with other real people. The alternative, the current reality, the player can simply double/triple/10x the amount of money he puts into the game, and now he can bypass the entire need to form relations with anyone with no apparent downside, in fact in many examples multiboxing is more efficient/performs better than having multiple real people controlling individual toons. There is no need to 'expand' the definition of P2W here. EVE favors those with more numbers, a good MMO, you can achieve the end result by either being sociable and engaging in MMO things, or you can simpy dump more money into CCP coffers and achieve the same (if not a better) result. "Pay to win is a specific business model to allow a single player who is willing to pay money to gain an advantage over another single player who doesnt." Any further definition is not needed. If it was the case that paying for a second copy of BF4 enabled you to run two players side by side, and the result was an advantage over someone only running one copy, then you have clear cut P2W. 'Golden ammo' is a nice easy to visualize example, but in no meaningful way is it distinct from other examples of P2W.
Beat me to it. It's a case of interpersonal relationships developed in-game, which is what an MMO is supposed to be about - vs. buying your own gang.
Anyone who has read my many responses would have notes that I happily concede that EVE is a game which has grown reliant on the use of alts.
However, I also make a distinction between using alts to deal with different areas of the game, for example a freighter to move ships or an incursion runner to generate isk; and using multiple accounts simultaneously to allow a single player to control a pair, a trio, or even a small fleet without having to contend with the all the issues attendant to relying on other human beings. It is pay to win by every reasonably definition, but that's the game and it won't be changing.
It's not a game breaking issue in most cases because of the efficiency loss involved in multiboxing larger numbers in more complex situations, because there aren't ALL that many people willing to drop $100 a month on subs alone or grind the requisite PLEX (especially with climbing prices), and most importantly because you can in almost every case stomp on a multiboxed in a PvP encounter by bringing friends. It's annoying because I have to recruit human players around an objective while they just have ro log in all their alts, but it is counterable.
Except in the case of links, which are afk-able most of the time and effectively un-counterable unless the user is asleep. |
Demerius Xenocratus
Rapid Withdrawal
565
|
Posted - 2015.08.05 04:42:12 -
[330] - Quote
Crosi Wesdo wrote:Yuri Antollare wrote: Yes, yes and yes? Everytime a soloer bitches and moans about people taking the easy road the response is 'its an MMO.'
The guy paying one subscription has to ask/form relations with other real players to engage in any of your examples (links, cyno, hauling.) In that view of the universe he is actually engaging in an MMO, his advantages over other individuals are accrued through working with other real people.
Massove strawman. Ive destroyed the P2W argument without sayng MMO a single time. There is no difference between a friend or an alt as far as an opponent is concerned. And if the opponnt IS concerned about it, HTFU.
There is objectively a difference between 5 players working together and 1 player controlling 5 ships.
The former is an MMO, the latter is a real time strategy game where you buy additional units with real world cash.
Would you like to play a game with 50000 human players or 10000 players and 40k alts?
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |